People'S Sav. Bank v. Borough of Norwalk

• Decision Date: 08 January 1889
• Citation: 56 Conn. 547,16 A. 257
• Court: Connecticut Supreme Court
• Parties: PEOPLE'S SAV. BANK v. BOROUGH OF NORWALK.

16 A. 257

56 Conn. 547

PEOPLE'S SAV. BANK

v. BOROUGH OF NORWALK.

Supreme Court of Errors of Connecticut.

January 8, 1889.

Appeal from superior court, Fairfield county.

Action by the People's Savings Bank against the borough of Norwalk to recover the principal and interest on 50 bonds issued by defendant. Verdict and judgment for plaintiff, and defendant appeals.

S. E. Baldwin, for appellant. H. & G. Stoddard, for appellee.

LOOMI8, J. The plaintiff, on the 1st day of July, 1886, was the owner by purchase of 50 bonds, each for $1,000, known as "Water Fund Bonds," issued in the year 1871 by the defendant borough upon authority granted by the general assembly, and bearing date July 1, 1871. These bonds were a part of an authorized issue of bonds to the amount of $175,000, all of that date, and put upon the market together, and had interest coupons attached, payable half-yearly on the 1st days of January and July, at the rate of 7 per cent. per annum. The bonds contained the promise of the borough to pay their amounts on the 1st day of July, 1896, at the Fairfield County National Bank in the borough of Norwalk, and also interest semi-annually at the rate of 7 per cent. per annum, on the presentation of the coupons at the same bank, and their surrender. The bonds contained also the following clause: "Sec. 4. This obligation is redeemable in full at the pleasure of said borough of Norwalk at any time after July 1, 1886, and before maturity, upon payment of the principal sum and interest accrued at the time of such redemption." The borough availed itself of this right to redeem the bonds before maturity, and gave public notice that they would be paid on presentation at the bank named, and on surrender of the bonds, on the 2d day of July, 1886. The borough deposited with the bank in question the amount of the principal of the entire issue of the bonds, and the other holders of them presented their bonds at the bank and accepted the principal in full payment of the same. The interest coupons due the day before were separately provided for, and were paid, including those held by the plaintiff, and no question arises in the case with regard to them. The plaintiff on the 19th of July presented its 50 bonds at the bank, and demanded payment of the principal and of the interest at 7 per cent. from the 1st day of July to that date. The bank denied the right of the plaintiff to any interest after the 1st day of July, and refused to pay anything beyond the principal of the bonds, and this the plaintiff refused to receive; and the present suit was afterwards brought upon the bonds. A question was made before the jury as to whether the plaintiff received notice of the call for the bonds by the borough on or before the 2d day of July, or not until the 19th, the plaintiff contending that the latter was the fact, and the defendant the former. This question, however, becomes wholly unimportant in the present position of the case. The plaintiff was clearly entitled, if notice of the call had been seasonably received, and it had presented the bonds on the 2d day of July, to one day's interest, amounting to $9.72. The jury, in its verdict, found this interest to be due, and the plaintiff does not complain of its insufficiency, while the defendant has no ground of complaint.

The judge charged the jury that if they found that the savings bank had notice that the bonds were called, and that there was not money enough in the Fairfield County Bank on that day to pay the bonds in full, principal and interest, then their verdict should be for the plaintiff for the $50,000, and interest thereon for one day at 7 per cent. added, and then interest on this sum at 6 per cent. from the 2d day of July to the time of trial. The jury returned the following verdict: "In this case the jury finds the issue for the plaintiff, and therefore finds for the plaintiff to recover of the defendant $50,000, and interest for one day to the amount of $9.72, making in all $50,009.72 damages, and his costs." The court did not accept the verdict, but said to the jury that as it appeared that they had omitted to compute the interest up to the time of trial, they might again retire, and make such computation. The verdict was handed back to the foreman, and the jury again retired to their room, where they remained from 15 to 30 minutes. When they again returned to court their names were again called, and they were asked if they had agreed on a verdict. The foreman answered that they had, and handed to the clerk a verdict for the plaintiff for $54,748.81. This the clerk took and read aloud. The court accepted it, and ordered it recorded. Thereupon the clerk, addressing the jury, said: "Gentlemen of the jury, listen to your verdict, as...