Taylor v. Industrial Mut. Deposit Co.'s Receiver

• Court: Kentucky Court of Appeals
• Writing for the Court: HOBSON, C.J.
• Citation: Taylor v. Industrial Mut. Deposit Co.'s Receiver, 96 S.W. 462 (Ky. Ct. App. 1906)
• Decision Date: 25 September 1906
• Parties: TAYLOR ET AL. v. INDUSTRIAL MUT. DEPOSIT CO.'S RECEIVER.

96 S.W. 462

TAYLOR ET AL. v. INDUSTRIAL MUT. DEPOSIT CO.'S RECEIVER.

Court of Appeals of Kentucky.

September 25, 1906

Appeal from Circuit Court, Owen County.

"Not to be officially reported."

Action by the Industrial Mutual Deposit Company's Receiver against A. P. Taylor and another. From a judgment for plaintiff, defendants appeal. Affirmed.

H. G Botts and W. A. Lee, for appellants.

B. T Southgate and Chas. Strother, for appellee.

HOBSON C.J.

A. P Taylor borrowed of the Industrial Mutual Deposit Company $3,000, for which he executed to it his note, and to secure the note, he and his wife executed to it a mortgage on three tracts of land in Owen county. Afterwards, by orders properly entered in the Fayette circuit court, B. T. Southgate was appointed receiver for the company, and, as such, filed this suit against Taylor and wife to recover on the note and foreclose the mortgage. Taylor answered, pleading that the note was without consideration. He also pleaded that while the company was doing business as such, he was the owner and holder of coupons issued by it, upon which he had paid it sums aggregating $74,500, which amount the company owed him. That he also owned an interest in the reserve fund of the corporation, amounting to several thousand dollars. That about February 19, 1902, the company desired him to surrender the coupons and the interest in the reserve fund which he held, and to take out certificates, or coupons, in a corporation known as the Germania Guaranty Company, of Covington, Ky. and to execute to that company a promissory note for the sum of $11,000. That it agreed with him that if he would do this, it would release all of the indebtedness claimed by it against him, including the note sued on, and release the mortgage securing it. That he accepted the proposition, and executed his note for $11,000 to the Germania Guaranty Company, and assigned to that company all his interest in the coupons, together with all his right to the assets of the Industrial Mutual Deposit Company, and all rights which had accrued, or might thereafter accrue, to him under his contract with that company; and in consideration of this, that company released and discharged all of the debts which it held against him, and surrendered to him all the evidence of the debts, including the note sued on. The allegations of the answer were denied by a reply. Proof was taken, and on final hearing the court...