Wisdom v. Smith

• Decision Date: 27 May 1936
• Citation: 124 Fla. 371,168 So. 814
• Parties: WISDOM et al. v. SMITH.
• Court: Florida Supreme Court

168 So. 814

124 Fla. 371

WISDOM et al. v. SMITH.

Florida Supreme Court, Division B.

May 27, 1936

Rehearing Denied June 26, 1936.

Suit by M. A. Smith, as liquidator, etc., against Ruth M. Wisdom joined by her husband, Louis E. Wisdom. From an adverse decree, the defendants appeal.

Affirmed. Appeal from Circuit Court, Hillsborough County Harry N. Sandler, judge.

COUNSEL

Mabry Reaves, Carlton & White, of Tampa, for appellants.

Edward Miraglia, of Tampa, for appellee.

OPINION

PER CURIAM.

The appeal in this case brings for review final decree of foreclosure on a chattel mortgage made and executed on March 24, 1928, by Ruth M. Wisdom, joined by her husband Louis E Wisdom, to the Bank of Ybor City to secure payment of a note made and executed by Strickland & Wisdom, Inc., and indorsed by Louis E. Wisdom for the sum of $1,400 payable 90 days after date. The mortgage contained the following clause:

'The parties of the first part do covenant and agree that the said Ruth M. Wisdom is the owner of the above described personal property and that they will pay or cause to be paid, the indebtedness secured by this instrument according to the true tenor and effect of the promissory note above described or of any renewal notes, and should it become necessary to collect such indebtedness through or by an attorney, that they will pay all costs of such collection, including a reasonable attorney's fee.'

Foreclosure proceedings were instituted after the statute of limitations had run as to the promissory note secured by the mortgage, but the mortgage was under seal, and the mortgagors specifically covenanted and agreed that they 'will pay or cause to be paid the indebtedness secured by this instrument according to the true tenor and effect of the promissory note above described,' etc.

When the husband agreed by the terms of the mortgage to pay the debt, he made the same his obligation and became liable for its payment. The wife may mortgage her separate property to secure the payment of her husband's debts. Section 1, article 11 of the Constitution; Springfield Co. v. Ely, 44 Fla. 319, 32 So. 892.

The appellant says that there are two questions for us to determine, which are as follows:

'Under the laws of the State of Florida may a married woman validly pledge or mortgage her personal property to secure a debt of a third person other than her husband, from which transaction neither she nor her...