People's Building, Loan & Savings Ass'n v. Pickrell

• Decision Date: 23 February 1900
• Citation: 55 S.W. 194
• Parties: PEOPLE'S BUILDING, LOAN & SAVINGS ASS'N v. PICKRELL et al. [1]
• Court: Kentucky Court of Appeals

55 S.W. 194

PEOPLE'S BUILDING, LOAN & SAVINGS ASS'N v. PICKRELL et al. ^[1]

Court of Appeals of Kentucky.

February 23, 1900

Appeal from circuit court, Montgomery county.

"Not to be officially reported."

Action by the People's Building, Loan & Savings Association against James M. Pickrell and others to recover a loan. Judgment for defendants on their counterclaim, and plaintiff appeals. Affirmed.

John M Elliott and Edward W. Hines, for appellant.

A. T Wood, Ed. C. O'Rear, and R. H. Winn, for appellees.

GUFFY J.

The appellant instituted this action in the Montgomery circuit court, seeking to obtain a judgment against the defendant for the sum of $3,094.28, besides interest, and also claiming a lien on certain real estate therefor. The defendant, by his answer, set up various grounds of defense, involving substantially the plea of usury, and also pleading a counterclaim against the plaintiff amounting to $2,200. The substance of the counterclaim is that he delivered to plaintiff an unrecorded deed to the property in controversy herein made to him by Childs, Thompson & Co., which the plaintiff negligently and carelessly lost and failed to return to him, and as a result thereof he was put to great expense in procuring a new deed, and prevented from selling the property in question until it had greatly depreciated in value. After the issues were fully made up and proof taken the court rendered the following judgment: "That the exceptions of the defendant Pickrell to said commissioner's report be, and the same are hereby sustained, and that the said report in all other respects be and the same is hereby, confirmed and approved. The court further adjudges that the said Pickrell is entitled to recover, and it is adjudged that he recover, the sum of $100 as damages occasioned by the suit necessitated for the substitution of his lost deed; and the court further adjudges that the said Pickrell, by the wrongful and negligent actions of the plaintiff, has sustained at least twenty-five per cent. damages on the value of the property mentioned in the pleadings, by reason of the depreciation of the property in the market value between the loss of the deed and its substitution, to wit, $1,125, and the said $1,125 and the $100 aforesaid is adjudged to the defendant J. M. Pickrell as a set-off herein, the amount found due by the defendant on the mortgage sued on as fixed by the commissioner as being...