Greensburg Bank v. Dep't of Financial Institutions
| Decision Date | 03 January 1938 |
| Docket Number | No. 15547.,15547. |
| Citation | 11 N.E.2d 1008 |
| Parties | GREENSBURG BANK et al. v. DEPARTMENT OF FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS et al. |
| Court | Indiana Appellate Court |
OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE
Appeal from Decatur Circuit Court, John W. Craig, Judge.
Proceedings in the matter of the liquidation of the Greensburg Bank in the possession of the Department of Financial Institutions of Indiana and J. H. Wheeler, representing the Department of Financial Institutions of Indiana, wherein David A. Myers filed a claim. From an adverse judgment, the claimant appeals.
Judgment reversed, with directions to grant a new trial.Thomas E. Davidson, Hugh D. Wickens, and Hubert E. Wickens, all of Greensburg, for appellant.
Joseph W. Verbarg, of North Vernon, for appellees.
On July 26, 1933, the Department of Financial Institutions, pursuant to the statute, chapter 40, Acts 1933 took possession of all the property and business of the Greensburg Bank for the purpose of liquidation and began to liquidate said bank through proceedings had in the Decatur circuit court. On September 20, 1933, the department, by its duly authorized representative, filed an inventory and appraisement of the assets and property of said bank, which included the following items:
+--------------------------------------------+
¦(43) 1 steel cabinet ¦$ 15.00 ¦
+-----------------------------------+--------¦
¦(45) 5 steel lockers $2.00 ¦10.00 ¦
+-----------------------------------+--------¦
¦(47) Vault door & frame ¦1,500.00¦
+-----------------------------------+--------¦
¦(48) 452 lock boxes ¦225.00 ¦
+-----------------------------------+--------¦
¦(49) O. B. McClintic burglar alarm ¦250.00 ¦
+-----------------------------------+--------¦
¦(50) Marble, bronze & wood fixtures¦2,000.00¦
+--------------------------------------------+
Thereafter appellant filed in the liquidation proceedings in said court his petition in two paragraphs, wherein he claimed that each and all of said articles were attached to and affixed permanently to the building of which he was the owner, were intended to be and form an integral part of the building, and were, therefore, a part of the real estate. Appellant prayed for an order releasing and surrendering to him the articles above enumerated. The petition was submitted to the court for trial, resulting in a finding and judgment for appellant as to item No. 45 and in favor of appellee as to items Nos. 43, 47, 48, 49, and 50. Appellant then moved the court to modify the judgment in prohibiting the removal of any of the articles in the event the removal caused a material injury to the building or any part of the freehold. This motion was overruled. Appellant in due time filed his motion for a new trial, which was overruled, and this appeal followed. Appellant assigns as error for reversal the overruling of each of said motions. The grounds in the motion for a new trial are that the decision of the court is not sustained by sufficient evidence and that the decision of the court is contrary to law.
It appears that in the year 1928 appellant and the Greensburg National Bank, by a committee selected by the board of directors of the bank and composed of the president, cashier, and two directors, began negotiations for the purpose of erecting a new bank building upon certain real estate then owned by appellant. Appellant proposed to furnish the money to erect a building suitable for appellee and especially adapted for banking business, in consideration of a return of 10 per cent. per annum to him of its original cost of construction. The bank was to have the privilege of purchasing the building at any time at the price of its original cost. Also, the bank was to pay for the fixtures which were to go into the building, including all of the items in question. Plans and specifications were prepared by an architect and submitted to the bank's committee for approval. Erection of the building was begun in 1929 and completed in 1930, and during the progress of the building the committee supervised the plans and details of the construction. The negotiations, arrangements, and transactions between appellant and the bank were never reduced to writing. All of the items in question were purchased by the bank and were installed in the building at the time of its construction. Item No. 43, a steel cabinet, was not attached to the building but was placed in the vault. Item No. 45 consisted of 5 unattached steel lockers. Items Nos. 47 and 48, listed as a vault door and frame and 452 lockboxes, were placed in cement in the building at the time of its original construction in order to make the building complete. The frame of the vault door was fitted into the structure by so constructing the building to fit its dimensions. The vault frame was attached to and formed a part of the wall of the bank so as to make the vault complete. The door, which was specially fitted to the frame, was fastened into the frame with bolts extendingout of the door and frame. An indentation was made on the south side of the vault for a space in which to put the steel lockboxes. The safety deposit boxes were especially made to fit and fill this space. Item No. 49, a burglar alarm, was built into the building, with the exception of the box inside of the money department in the vault and the alarm box on the exterior of the building. The wiring was put in as a part of the vault at the time it was constructed, and it extended through a portion of the vault wall. Item No. 50 consisted of marble, bronze, and wood fixtures which were attached in accordance with the plans and specifications and were particularly constructed and adapted to the dimensions of the building. They were fastened to the floor and to the concrete with supports from the steel joists underneath the floor. The bronze and marble attached to these fixtures was fastened into the wall and corresponded with the architecture of the interior of the building. It was clearly the intention of both appellant and the bank that the building was to be especially constructed and particularly adapted for a bank. Thereafter the Greensburg Bank took over the Greensburg National Bank and assumed all of its liabilities.
The architect who drew the plans and specifications which were used in the construction of the building testified: ...
To continue reading
Request your trial