Reichle v. Bentele

• Decision Date: 01 December 1902
• Citation: 97 Mo. App. 52,70 S.W. 919
• Parties: REICHLE v. BENTELE.
• Court: Missouri Court of Appeals

70 S.W. 919

97 Mo. App. 52

REICHLE v. BENTELE.

Court of Appeals at Kansas City, Missouri.

December 1, 1902.

RENEWAL OF NOTE — DURESS — EVIDENCE — THREATS.

1. Defendant, being indebted to plaintiff on a past-due note, was asked by plaintiff and his attorney to sign a renewal note and mortgage to secure the same. Defendant hesitated, when the lawyer showed him his former note, and said it was all right, — he owed the money. The lawyer said: But "that note has not any stamps on it. Don't you know that you are in a fix?" and that "that will cost you $500, or you get two years in the penitentiary." Plaintiff then said, "You simply sign them papers, and then you are all right." Defendant then signed the papers. In his answer defendant alleged that the note and mortgage were forced from him by plaintiff's threats that if he did not sign them plaintiff would cause defendant to be immediately arrested, and imprisoned in the penitentiary. Held, that the statements made by plaintiff and his attorney did not constitute duress nor sustain the allegations of the answer.

Appeal from circuit court, Macon county; Hon. Nat M. Shelton, Judge.

Action by George Reichle against Frank Sales Bentele. From a judgment for plaintiff, defendant appeals. Affirmed.

Hess & Lacy, for appellant. Guthrie & Franklin and R. W. Barrow, for respondent.

ELLIOTT, J.

This is an action of replevin for several head of cattle. At the close of the evidence the trial court gave a peremptory instruction for the plaintiff. Plaintiff claims title by virtue of a chattel mortgage executed by defendant to secure the payment of defendant's note to plaintiff for $350. The defendant claimed that the mortgage and note were invalid, for the reason that they were forced from him by threats of arrest and imprisonment in the penitentiary. His answer was that plaintiff told him that, if he did not sign the note and mortgage securing the same, "then that he, the said plaintiff, would cause defendant to be immediately arrested, and imprisoned in the penitentiary, and that in fear and apprehension of such imprisonment as aforesaid, and induced, frightened, and intimidated by such threats," he executed the note and mortgage. It appears that plaintiff, a man of 70 years, aided defendant, 30 years of age, in the purchase of a farm, which cost $2,350. Plaintiff borrowed $400 of the money of one Snider, for which Snider had a first mortgage on the land, and plaintiff took a second mortgage for $1,950. Afterwards matters were rearranged so that defendant borrowed of a loan company $1,600, and paid off Snider, giving the loan company first mortgage, the plaintiff releasing his mortgage securing the $1,950 owing him. Defendant paid plaintiff a part of that debt, but still owed him $1,100, for which plaintiff accepted his unsecured note. This latter note had become due, and plaintiff, learning that some other creditor was proceeding against defendant, prepared two notes, — one for $750, to be secured by second mortgage on the land, and the other for $350, to be secured by chattel mortgage. Defendant executed these notes and secured them by the land and the chattel mortgage under circumstances which defendant claims was...