Watson v. Butler
| Decision Date | 22 January 1935 |
| Docket Number | Case Number: 21950 |
| Citation | 170 Okla. 350,1935 OK 52,40 P.2d 653 |
| Court | Oklahoma Supreme Court |
| Parties | WATSON v. BUTLER et al McCREE et al v. LOCAL BUILDING & LOAN ASS'N |
¶0 APPEAL AND ERROR--Judgment Right on Merits not Reversed.
Where an examination of the whole case shows that the judgment of the trial court is right on the merits, the judgment will not be reversed.
Appeal from District Court, Tulsa County; Saul A. Yager, Judge.
Action by George Butler and another against Ioan V. Watson consolidated with an action by the Local Building & Loan Association against Ioan V. McCree and others. Judgment for plaintiffs, and defendants appeal. Affirmed.
Ben C. Franklin, of Tulsa, and A. C. Hunt, of Oklahoma City, for plaintiffs in error.
Everest, McKenzie, Halley & Gibbens, of Oklahoma City, for defendants in error.
¶1 George Butler and Sarah Butler sued Ioan V. Watson in the district court of Tulsa county for foreclosure of a real estate mortgage. A separate suit was filed by the Local Building & Loan Association of Oklahoma City to foreclose a real estate mortgage on the same property. The two causes were consolidated in the district court, and, after trial, judgment was rendered in favor of plaintiffs decreeing a foreclosure of the mortgages involved, and defendant appeals. There is no dispute between the plaintiffs as to the priority of their respective mortgages. The mortgage to the Local Building & Loan Association was a first mortgage and the mortgage to the Butlers was a second mortgage. The issues of law and fact are identical in the cases so that it is not necessary to make separate statements.
¶2 Ioan V. Watson was the owner of a plot of land in the city of Tulsa and in 1924 borrowed $31,500 from the Industrial Building & Loan Association and executed to it a mortgage on the land. She erected houses on the property and sold a number of them and reduced the indebtedness to approximately $5,000. When said indebtedness became due, defendant borrowed $4,000 from plaintiff Local Building & Loan Association and executed to it a mortgage on lots 1, 2, and 3 of block 5 of the Northside addition to the city of Tulsa. She also borrowed $1,150 from plaintiffs George Butler and Sarah Butler, and gave them a second mortgage on the same property. With the funds so procured, she paid the indebtedness owing to the Industrial Building & Loan Association and secured a release of the mortgage executed in 1924. The notes and mortgage to the Butlers were executed August 15, 1927. The notes and mortgage to the Local Building & Loan Association were executed August 19, 1927.
¶3 By way of defense, it is alleged that defendant on October 1, 1925, married one Ambrose McCree and was a married woman at the time the mortgages involved herein were executed and her husband did not sign the mortgages and that the property constituted their homestead. The plaintiffs admit the marriage on the date alleged, but contend that the evidence does not show that the property was ever used or occupied as a homestead or that the homestead character ever attached. It is further contended that when the defendants herein furnished the funds at the request of the owner of the property to pay the debt and discharge the prior mortgage lien without knowledge of the intervening rights of the husband, they thereby became subrogated to the lien of the mortgage so released.
¶4 The court made a general...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
United Fed. Sav. & Loan Ass'n v. Johnson
...230 P. 500; Landis v. State ex rel. Commissioners of the Land Office, 179 Okla. 547, 66 P.2d 519; Watson v. Butler (McCree v. Local Building & Loan Association), 170 Okla. 350, 40 P.2d 653. ¶35 We are inclined to think that the trial court entirely misconstrued the mandate of this court in ......
-
Landis v. State ex rel. Com'Rs of the Land Office, Case Number: 27179
...been induced to accept a void mortgage as security for the discharge of the prior valid one. See, also, Watson v. Butler (McCree. v. Local Bldg. & Loan Ass'n), 170 Okla. 350, 40 P.2d 653. There was no error granting the plaintiff subrogation. ¶6 This brings us to the next contention of the ......
-
Equitable Life Assur. Soc. of U.S. v. Neale
...Prudential Insurance Co. v. Foster, 197 Okl. 39, 168 P.2d 295, 166 A.L.R. 1, Pine v. Duncan, 179 Okl. 336, 65 P.2d 492 and Watson v. Butler, 170 Okl. 350, 40 P.2d 653. We find that the instructions as a whole fairly submitted the issues which were supported by We are of the view that the de......
-
Hardy v. Bowzer
...of the whole case shows that the judgment of the trial court is right on the merits, the judgment will not be reversed. Watson v. Butler, 170 Okla. 350, 40 P.2d 653. In the instant case no contention is made that the verdict was excessive. ¶7 We have examined with care the argument of appel......