People's Bank of Mobile v. Barret

• Citation: 216 Ala. 344,113 So. 389
• Decision Date: 09 June 1927
• Docket Number: 1 Div. 448
• Court: Alabama Supreme Court
• Parties: PEOPLE'S BANK OF MOBILE v. BARRET.

113 So. 389

216 Ala. 344

PEOPLE'S BANK OF MOBILE v. BARRET.

1 Div. 448

Supreme Court of Alabama

June 9, 1927

Appeal from Circuit Court, Mobile County; Claude A. Grayson, Judge.

Bill in equity by Kate W. Barret against the People's Bank of Mobile and another. From a decree overruling its demurrer to the bill, defendant named appeals. Affirmed.

Harry T. Smith & Caffey, of Mobile, for appellant.

George B. Cleveland, of Mobile, for appellee.

GARDNER J.

The appeal is from the decree overruling appellant's demurrer to appellee's bill as amended.

Complainant is a married woman, the wife of B.T. Barret, who was, at the time of the transaction here complained of, indebted to the People's Bank of Mobile, and for which indebtedness complainant was in no manner responsible. Complainant was the owner of an undivided interest in certain lands in the state of Mississippi, but the parties to the suit are residents of this state, and all transactions in reference to the subject of this bill took place in this state. James K. Glennon was vice president of defendant bank and the bill alleges that--

"In order to secure the debt of her husband *** to the extent of $5,000, and in an attempt to circuitously evade the law of Alabama forbidding a married woman from becoming security for her husband's debt, she was persuaded to execute and did execute an instrument purporting to convey to James K. Glennon, vice president of the said People's Bank of Mobile, the defendant, a one-sixth undivided interest owned by her as her separate estate in certain lands in Jackson county in the state of Mississippi," therein specifically described.

The bill further shows that, at the same time such conveyance was made, the said Glennon executed an instrument to Barret Bros Shipping Company, a corporation of which complainant's husband was president and controlled, or under which he was doing business, providing for a resale of the property for $5,000 within a period of two years, and simultaneously therewith the defendant bank indorsed on said instrument its guaranty of the performance thereof by Glennon; whereupon Barret Bros Shipping Company immediately assigned the instrument to complainant. The bill then avers:

"Complainant alleges that the said transaction was not a bona fide sale to the said Glennon, with an option, but was a security to the defendant People's Bank at Mobile for the indebtedness so owed by her husband, B.T. Barret, to it to the extent of $5,000 and interest, upon which complainant was in no way liable, and said security was upon part of her separate estate."

It is further alleged that the said Glennon was merely a conduit or trustee in said transaction, having no real interest therein and subsequently conveyed whatever he acquired by complainant's deed to defendant bank.

The bill contains some details of litigation in regard to the property here involved in the chancery court of Mississippi, which needs no elaboration here further than to note that upon the bill filed in that state for a sale of the land for division, to which suit complainant was not a party, but in which the title passing by her conveyance to Glennon was included, the land was sold at public outcry; one F.H. Lewis being the purchaser, but in fact representing the defendant bank, and thereafter conveying the same to said bank and one J.M. Walsh, an undivided one-half interest each.

There are alternative prayers for relief as well as general prayer therefor, but that upon which counsel for complainant most strenuously insists seeks to have the transaction whereby complainant conveyed to Glennon declared void as violative of the statute of this state, and defendant bank execute to complainant a deed to the interest she then conveyed or that such interest be divested out of said bank, and vested in complainant.

Upon allegations bearing close analogy to those here presented and concerning like transactions of complainant with other parties, this court has upheld the equity of the bill. Horst v. Barret, 213 Ala. 173, 104 So. 530; Staples v. Barret, 214 Ala. 680, 108 So. 742, 46 A.L.R. 1084. Though the lands are situated in another state, yet a court of equity having acquired jurisdiction of the parties in this state has authority to enter a...