Keyser v. Hays

• Citation: 177 S.W. 335,190 Mo.App. 380
• Parties: GERTIE KEYSER, Respondent, v. G. PURD HAYS, Defendant, and McGREGOR-NOE HARDWARE COMPANY, a Corporation, Interpleader, Appellant
• Decision Date: 17 June 1915
• Court: Missouri Court of Appeals

177 S.W. 335

190 Mo.App. 380

GERTIE KEYSER, Respondent, v. G. PURD HAYS, Defendant, and McGREGOR-NOE HARDWARE COMPANY, a Corporation, Interpleader, Appellant

Court of Appeals of Missouri, Springfield

June 17, 1915

Appeal from Christian County Circuit Court.--Hon. John T. Moore Judge.

AFFIRMED.

Judgment affirmed.

G. Purd Hays for appellant.

S. E Bronson for respondent.

STURGIS J. Robertson, P. J., and Farrington, J., concur.

OPINION

STURGIS, J.

--This is a suit in replevin originally brought against one Hays for possession of two promissory notes, one for $ 100 and the other for $ 200, in his physical possession. The defendant Hays answered that he had no interest in the notes except as agent of the "Interpleaders." The McGregor-Noe Hardware Company is designated as the interpleader in an "interplea" or answer filed by it but it is more properly a defendant, made such on its own motion on the ground of its being a real party in interest. The defendant Hays came into possession of the notes as agent and attorney for this interpleader and some other wholesale firms having a like interest. The interpleader, for itself and such other firms, claims a rightful possession of the notes as collateral security for the notes of H. E. Keyser, brother of the plaintiff, to such interpleaders.

The origin of this controversy is that H. E. Keyser, being a merchant at Riverdale, Christian county, Missouri, became indebted to interpleader in the sum of $ 151.15. He was also indebted to three other wholesale firms in smaller amounts aggregating in all $ 342.39. The defendant Hays had these four accounts for collection and H. E. Keyser was being threatened with bankruptcy proceedings. H. E. Keyser owed in all some $ 1400, but defendant Hays did not hold all such debts for collection. The plaintiff was the owner of the notes now in controversy and at least one other note, and there was some talk and negotiations looking to her helping her brother and preventing his bankruptcy by putting up her notes to his creditors as collateral security. Whether this was actually done was the question contested at the trial and decided in plaintiff's favor.

Plaintiff admits that she offered to put up these notes as collateral for her brother on condition that his creditors give him "a certain length of time" to sell his goods to pay the same. Some of the creditors, especially those represented by Hays, agreed to this but others did not. One of the creditors represented by Hays did not acquiesce in this arrangement and one of plaintiff's notes for $ 500, which such creditor was to receive as collateral, was returned to this plaintiff. Plaintiff's notes were at a bank for safe-keeping and defendant Hays testified that she agreed to put up the same as collateral security for the debts of interpleader and the other three creditors then represented by him and directed Hays to get the notes from the bank which he accordingly did. Plaintiff denies that any such arrangement was consummated and says that she did not deliver...