Grow v. Cockrill
Citation | 39 S.W. 60 |
Parties | GROW v. COCKRILL. |
Decision Date | 06 February 1897 |
Court | Supreme Court of Arkansas |
Appeal from circuit court, Pulaski county; Robert J. Sea, Judge.
Action by Jennie Grow against S. R. Cockrill, receiver of the First National Bank. Judgment for defendant, and plaintiff appeals. Affirmed.
The appellant, Jennie Grow, had a credit in the First National Bank, Little Rock, in February, 1892, and on the 15th of that month wrote to H. G. Allis, then president of that bank, addressing him in his individual capacity, however, and made inquiry of him as to how much the bank would pay as interest for the loan of her money, or language to that effect. This letter seems to have been answered on the 24th by W. C. Denny, who was then cashier, and he informed her, among other things: "If you care to avail yourself of this loan, let me hear from you." On May 2d appellant wrote again, asking if the loan could still be made as stated in Denny's letter of February 24th, and quoted last above; also as to the rate of interest she could get; and also saying she had about $900, including the amount in bank, then amounting to $500. Denny answered this letter on the 5th May, saying: "Replying to your favor of the 2d inst., have to say, if you will send us enough to make $1,000, we can get you a loan for one year at 9 per cent., secured by the stock of this bank, interest payable semiannually." On May 16, 1892, appellant wrote, saying: This letter was answered by Denny on the 21st May, saying: This correspondence is given in full, in order to show the exact nature of the transaction between the appellant and these bank officials, as well as the relation of the parties to the loan, which was, on the 2d of June, 1892, made in accordance with the tenor of this correspondence. The appellant, during the period of this correspondence, was residing in Caldwell, Kan., and wrote her letters from that place. It seems that she subsequently moved to Washington City. The Mrs. Kimbrough was an aunt of appellant, residing in Little Rock, and the Cousin "Cliff" mentioned subsequently in testimony and letter was T. C. Powell, then residing in Little Rock, a good business man, and one well acquainted with such business as he was called upon to transact by and for appellant. He has since died. Mrs. Kimbrough testified that appellant, from Washington City, in May, 1892, wrote to her as follows, to wit: Witness proceeding further stated: G. R. Brown testified, in substance, that on June 2, 1892, Denny brought the note in suit to him to sign, saying that Mrs. Grow had some money in bank which Allis wanted to borrow, and he (Allis) desired me to make the note for it. Witness answered, "All right; if he will put up the security." He did not own the stock, never got the money, and never knew anything more about it. He said the bank failed in February, 1893, and previous to that event he had signed accommodation paper for Allis amounting to several hundred thousand dollars. Witness stated that when he made the note in suit on the 2d June, 1892, he was the owner of $25,000 worth of property, but that when the bank failed, in February following, Allis failed, and that made him (witness) insolvent. The testimony of Clement H. Yost, a former bookkeeper of the bank, shows that on 2d June, 1892, appellant had to her credit in the bank $1,000, and that on that day Allis' account was credited with $1,000; that Allis' account, at that time, was overdrawn to the amount of $23,249; that he had no way of telling from the books why Mrs. Grow was debited with $1,000, or why Allis was credited with $1,000, on that day; that the certificate of stock was genuine, and that it was shown upon the books that it belonged to Allis, and that he purchased the same from Roots, and that Allis' irregular transactions wrecked the...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
First Nat. Bank of Hagerman v. Stringfield
......346, 14 S.Ct. 572,. 38 L.Ed. 470.). . . A. national bank has no power to engage to make loans for others. or to act as brokers. (Grow v. Cockrill, 63 Ark. 418, 39 S.W. 60, 36 L. R. A. 89; Weckler v. First Nat. Bank, 42 Md. 581, 20 Am. Rep. 95; First Nat. Bank v. Hoch, 89 Pa. 324, ......
-
Sullivan v. Arkansas Valley Bank
...... alleged the bank did do in this instance is ultra vires, and that, for that reason, the bank is not liable, and learned counsel cite the case of Grow v. Cockrill, 63 Ark. 418, 39 S. W. 60, 36 L. R. A. 89. The only question decided in that case, as we understand it, was that a ......