McReynolds v. First National Bank

• Decision Date: 18 December 1922
• Docket Number: 55
• Citation: McReynolds v. First National Bank, 156 Ark. 291, 245 S. W. 819 (Ark. 1922)
• Parties: MCREYNOLDS v. FIRST NATIONAL BANK
• Court: Arkansas Supreme Court

245 S.W. 819

156 Ark. 291

MCREYNOLDS v. FIRST NATIONAL BANK

No. 55

Supreme Court of Arkansas

December 18, 1922

Appeal from Conway Chancery Court; W. E. Atkinson, Chancellor affirmed.

STATEMENT OF FACTS.

The First National Bank brought this suit in equity against W. A Hunter and T. M. McReynolds to obtain an accounting for certain property alleged to belong to the plaintiff under a mortgage executed to it by W. A. Hunter.

The facts, briefly stated, are as follows: On the 10th day of February, 1920, W. A. Hunter executed a chattel mortgage on his crop and other personal property to T. M. Reynolds to secure a note for $ 220 and an open account. The mortgage was duly filed for record on the 18th day of February, 1920, and was signed by said Hunter, "W. H. Hunter." On the 14th day of April, 1920, W. A. Hunter executed a mortgage to the Citizens' Bank on the same property to secure a note for $ 257.57 and an open account. This mortgage was filed for record on the 20th day of April, 1920, and bears the following indorsement: "This instrument to be filed, but not recorded. (Signed) Citizens' Bank."

The correct name of the mortgagor is W. A. Hunter.

T. M McReynolds did not know Hunter personally and did not know what the correct initials of his name were at the time Hunter executed the mortgage in question to him. The notes and the mortgages given to secure the same were offered in evidence by each party. The Citizens' Bank duly transferred its note and mortgage to the First National Bank, the plaintiff in the court below.

The chancery court found that the mortgage of the plaintiff was a superior lien to that of T. M. McReynolds, and a decree was entered accordingly. To reverse that decree T. M. McReynolds has duly prosecuted an appeal to this court.

Decree affirmed.

Edward Gordon, for appellant.

Sec 7384, C. & M. Dig., requires the indorsement on a chattel mortgage to be signed by the mortgagee, his agent or attorney. 130 Ark. 290; 37 Ark. 507; 43 Ark. 144; 52 Ark. 164; 83 Ark. 109; 121 Ark. 346. The case is ruled by 59 Ark. 151. The middle initial of a name is immaterial. 12 Ark. 622; 3 Pet. 1; 14 Pet. 322.

Strait & Strait, for appellee.

The indorsement was properly signed. 60 Ark. 112; 40 Ark. 431. A mortgage executed by a person signing false initials does not constitute notice. 59 Ark. 151; 32 L. R. A. N. S. 243; 97 Am. St. Rep. 54; S.Ct. Rep., vol. 9, No. 6, p. 448; 7 L. R. A. N. S. 415; 25 L. R. A. N. S. 1211; 25 L. R. A. 543; 26 S.W. 821; 53 Am. Dec. 586; 47 Am. Dec. 305; 24 Am. St. Rep. 728.

OPINION

HART, J. (after stating the facts).

It will be noted that the correct name of the mortgagor is W. A. Hunter. The mortgage to T. M. McReynolds was executed first, but it was signed by Hunter as W. H. Hunter instead of W. A. Hunter. The mortgage to the Citizens' Bank, while executed on a later date, was signed by Hunter under his correct name, W. A. Hunter.

Counsel for the defendant seeks to reverse the decision of the chancellor on the authority of Fincher v. Hanegan, 59 Ark. 151, 26 S.W. 821. In that case the court held that a mistake in the initial of the middle name of a mortgagor does not necessarily defeat the effect of the record as notice, under the common-law rule that the middle initial of a name is immaterial where the Christian name is used, and where it did not appear that there was more than one person of that name in the county. In that case the true name of the mortgagor was Henry M. Ward, and he signed the mortgage as Henry N. Ward. By the common law, a full name consists of one Christian or given name and one surname, and the two constitute the legal name of the person. The middle name or middle initial of a person does not affect his legal name. So the court held that, because the law knows only one Christian name, a wrong middle initial might be inserted in a mortgage without affecting its validity.

We do not think that case is an authority in the present case. There the mortgagor executed the mortgage by his full or true Christian name and surname. Here he executed the first mortgage by using his initials only. It has grown into such universal practice to sign one's name by using the initials instead of the full Christian name that it would not do to hold that a mistake in the middle initial amounted to no more than such a mistake when the Christian name is written in full. If such is the case, the recording act will fall short of its purpose. The difference in the two classes is apparent. To illustrate, suppose two brothers should be named William H. Hunter and Wiley A. Hunter. If each one should sign a deed or mortgage by using his initials instead of his full Christian name no harm would result, for one would sign W. H. Hunter and the other W. A. Hunter. In such case there could be no confusion about who signed the mortgage, and no one would be misled by examining the records.

Again suppose one should use his full Christian name "William" and the other his full Christian name "Wiley;" any one who knew the parties, in examining the records would not be misled, even though the wrong middle...