Ridgefield Sav. Bank v. Sherwood
| Decision Date | 01 June 1917 |
| Court | Connecticut Supreme Court |
| Parties | RIDGEFIELD SAV. BANK v. SHERWOOD. |
Appeal from Court of Common Pleas, Fairfield County; John J. Walsh, Judge.
Suit by the Ridgefield Savings Bank against Thomas L. Sherwood. Judgment for plaintiff, and defendant appeals. No error.
An action to foreclose a mortgage. The following facts were found by the court:
In December, 1911, the defendant was the owner of certain real estate upon which was a mortgage given to secure his note for $1,000 to the Mechanics' & Farmers' Savings Bank. On the 24th day of December, 1913, the Savings Bank commenced an action to foreclose the mortgage to the court of common pleas in Fairfield county.
As a result of a suggestion from the officer who served the process, the defendant consulted Clitus H. King, an attorney at law, who entered an appearance as counsel for defendant. King later applied to the Ridgefield Savings Bank in behalf of Sherwood for a loan of $1,200 upon the property. The land records of the town of Fairfield, where the land was situated, were examined by King and Samuel Keeler, the president of the plaintiff bank, who is also an attorney at law. The bank agreed to make the loan as requested. Sherwood executed a note for $1,200 and a mortgage upon the property to secure the same to the plaintiff before King as notary public, and King then forged the indorsement of the record of the mortgage as purporting to be made by the assistant town clerk of Fairfield upon the mortgage deed.
The plaintiff drew two checks to the order of Keeler, one for $1,000 and one for $179.50, and Keeler Indorsed them over to King. Keeler gave the checks to King with instructions to pay the mortgage note of $1,000 to the Mechanics' & Farmers' Bank, and also pay the accummulated interest and costs of the foreclosure action, and see that the remainder of the sum was used for making some repairs upon the property. King had arranged with attorneys of the Mechanics' & Farmers' Bank to allow its mortgage to remain, provided the interest and costs of the foreclosure action were paid, and he paid the sum of $124.38, being the amount due. King did not pay to Mechanics' & Farmers' Savings Bank the remainder of the money, but converted the same to his own use, and Sherwood did not receive the benefit of any part of it except $124.38.
The property is now subject to the two mortgages, one to the Mechanics' & Farmers' Savings Bank, and one to the plaintiff bank...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Allen v. Nissley
...The exception to the exception does not apply to the facts in this case. The defendant's reliance on Ridgefield Savings Bank v. Sherwood, 91 Conn. 648, 100 A. 1063 (1917) is misplaced. The issue in that case was whether a principal-agent relationship existed, not the imputation of an agent'......
-
Atlantic Life Ins. Co. v. Rowland
...A. 340; Knox County v. Goggin, 105 Mo. 182, 16 S. W. 684; Blackwell v. Br. Mtg. Co., 65 S. C. 105, 43 S. E. 395; Ridgefield Svgs. Bank v. Sherwood, 91 Conn. 648, 100 A. 1063; Schuling v. Ervin, 185 Iowa, 1, 169 N. W. 686; Engleman v. Reuse, 61 Mich. 395, 28 N. W. 149; Trustees v. Livingston......
- Middleton v. Conn. Co.
- Walker v. Conn. Co.