Lacey v. Loughridge

Decision Date07 October 1879
Citation2 N.W. 515,51 Iowa 629
PartiesLACEY v. LOUGHRIDGE ET AL
CourtIowa Supreme Court

Appeal from Mahaska Circuit Court.

A JUDGMENT was rendered against plaintiff upon a demurrer to his amended petition, from which he appeals to this court. The facts of the case fully appear in the opinion.

AFFIRMED.

W. R Lacey, for appellant.

Lafferty & Johnson, for appellees.

OPINION

BECK CH. J.

The original petition alleges that P. Loughridge executed an instrument in writing in the following words:

"OSKALOOSA IOWA, March 10, 1870.

"On condition that the line or track of the Central Railroad of Iowa substantially as now located, is finished from Albia to Oskaloosa, and the same operated on or before the 15th day of November, A. D. 1870, I promise to pay said Central Railroad Company of Iowa on or before the day aforesaid, five acres of timber, valued at twenty-five dollars per acre, with ten per cent interest from maturity.

"When paid, this will entitle me to stock in said company. A failure to complete and operate said road by the time above stated will render this note void.

"P. LOUGHRIDGE."

It is alleged that the conditions of the note were fully performed, and the plaintiff is the owner thereof; that the maker is deceased, and defendants are his administrators and heirs, and that P. Loughridge died seized of certain lands described in the petition. The relief asked is that a decree be entered setting apart to plaintiff five acres of land of the value named in the contract sued upon.

An amended petition shows that when P. Loughridge died the instrument sued upon was in dispute and litigation, and not in the hands of plaintiff's assignor, and that such litigation was not settled until the time for filing claims, as provided by law, had expired; that plaintiff's assignor, as soon as possession of the note was obtained, presented it to the administrator, and demanded a conveyance of the land, which was refused, and thereby the claim was converted into a money demand. The amended petition asks that plaintiff be allowed to prove up his claim against the estate, and the administrator be ordered to pay the same. A demurrer to the petition as amended was sustained.

An amended petition was then filed, which, as it was successfully assailed by demurrer, must be set out in full. It is as follows:

"The plaintiff, amending his petition, states that Poultney Loughridge died on the day of November, 1874, and that, and at and prior to the death of said Loughridge, the note or contract sued upon belonged to the Iowa Valley Construction Company.

"That said not or contract, at the time of the death of said Loughridge, was in the hands of Seevers & Cutts, attorneys at law, at Oskaloosa.

"That said note or contract was one of a large number of similar contracts in the hands of said Seevers & Cutts, who had been collecting the same for the use and benefit of said Iowa Valley Construction Company, and for the use and benefit of said Seevers & Cutts; the said Seevers & Cutts holding the same as collateral to secure an advance of ten thousand dollars, by them made for the use and benefit of the Iowa Central Railroad Company and the Central Railroad Company of Iowa and the said Iowa Valley Construction Company.

"That shortly prior to the death of the said Poultney Loughridge a controversy arose between F. W. H. Sheffield and others as to who was the proper person to represent the said corporation the Iowa Valley Construction Company, the then owner of the said notes.

"That the said Seevers & Cutts, owing to said controversy, ceased to make any efforts to collect the said notes, and suit for the possession of the same was brought against said Seevers & Cutts in the Circuit Court of Mahaska county, Iowa. A demand was made upon said Seevers & Cutts for a list of said notes and contracts uncollected, and said Seevers & Cutts informed the plaintiff in said action that they had been requested, by the opposing parties, not to give any information in relation thereto until after the determination of said suit against the...

To continue reading

Request your trial
1 cases

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT