Reconstruction Finance Corporation v. Rovetti, 2596.

• Decision Date: 02 March 1936
• Docket Number: No. 2596.,2596.
• Parties: RECONSTRUCTION FINANCE CORPORATION v. ROVETTI et al.
• Court: U.S. District Court — District of Nevada

15 F. Supp. 33

RECONSTRUCTION FINANCE CORPORATION v. ROVETTI et al.

No. 2596.

District Court, D. Nevada.

March 2, 1936.

N. J. Barry, of Reno, Nev., and Brobeck, Phleger & Harrison, of San Francisco, Cal., for plaintiff.

W. M. Kearney, of Reno, Nev., for defendant M. L. Yori.

NORCROSS, District Judge.

This is an action upon a promissory note alleged to have been made, executed, and delivered by the defendant J. Rovetti on or about November 26, 1930, to the Reno National Bank, and thereafter, on or about June 14, 1932, assigned and delivered by said bank to plaintiff as collateral security and as a pledge for a loan in excess of the amount of said note, and that ever since plaintiff has held the same as pledgee, and now is the owner and holder of said note.

The note in question is dated November 26, 1930, for the principal sum of $10,000, payable on demand after date, signed J. Rovetti, and bearing the number 4333. On the reverse side of the note appear the signatures of the defendants Dora Rovetti and M. L. Yori. At the time of the assignment there was a balance due upon the principal of the note of $6,500, and three months' accrued interest.

Defendants filed a demurrer to the complaint, which was overruled and time given to answer. Defendants Rovetti failed to answer, and their defaults were entered. The defendant Yori filed an answer, and the controlling question in this case so far as his liability is concerned is presented upon the following paragraph of his answer: "This defendant denies that prior to or simultaneously with the execution and/or delivery of said promissory note, this defendant endorsed said promissory note, but in this connection the defendant alleges that a long time after the making, execution and delivery of the said note * * * the then cashier of the Reno National Bank requested this defendant to place his endorsement upon said note in order that the same would comply with certain regulations imposed by the examiner of national banks and stated to this defendant at said time that this defendant would not be called upon or expected to pay the said note; that the said endorsement was made without any consideration whatever flowing from the said Reno National Bank to this defendant and was made only at the request of said bank under the conditions hereinabove stated."

Testimony upon the part of the defendant was to the effect that the two defendant indorsers of the note did not so indorse the same until some time from a week to a month after its date and delivery to the bank by the maker, defendant J. Rovetti, at which time of delivery the money was paid or credit given thereon. Testimony to the contrary was given by officials of the bank.

It is unnecessary to consider the many conflicts in the testimony of the witnesses respecting acts and conversations occurring five years prior to the giving of the testimony. After such a lapse of time, human memory is not always reliable. There was submitted upon the part of plaintiff certain documentary evidence of the Reno National Bank which in the opinion of the court must be regarded as decisive of the question as to when the indorsements were made, and that they were made prior to the time the note was delivered and the payment thereon made or credit given. The document referred to is a leaf testified to as having been taken from the Loans and Interest Journal of the Reno National Bank; said journal being of the loose-leaf character. The said leaf is designated on one side as folio No. 375 and on the other side as folio No. 376. The folios are dated, respectively, November 26, 1930, and November 28, 1930. Each folio or page is divided into sides for "debits" and "credits." On the debit side of the folios appears under the...