Wolford v. Young

• Decision Date: 18 May 1898
• Citation: 75 N.W. 349,105 Iowa 512
• Parties: F. W. WOLFORD v. ANDREW A. YOUNG, Appellant
• Court: Iowa Supreme Court

75 N.W. 349

105 Iowa 512

F. W. WOLFORD v. ANDREW A. YOUNG, Appellant

Supreme Court of Iowa, Des Moines

May 18, 1898

Appeal from Boone District Court.--HON. S. M. WEAVER, Judge.

THE following is appellant's statement of the facts and the issues. On the ninth day of March, 1889, the appellee, who then resided and now resides in Boone county, Iowa purchased of the appellant certain land in Boone county, and gave the appellant the note and mortgage in controversy in this action in part payment thereof; the said note being for the amount of four hundred dollars, and attached thereto in the usual form, interest coupons calling for twenty-eight dollars annual interest during the period of said note, being until 1894. The said note was made payable at the Wilson & Toms Investment Company, St. Louis, Mo. The appellant executed a deed for the land thus conveyed, and was at the time, and is now, a resident of Syracuse, N.Y. The negotiations for the sale and purchase of the land appear to have been conducted through one J. C. Hall, then a law partner of Hon. D. R Hindman, of Boone, Iowa The appellee, as the interest coupons became due, remitted to the Wilson & Toms Investment Company at St. Louis, the amount due thereon, and received from them in the ordinary course of mail an acknowledgment of the same in the following form: "Central Trust Company, Oriel Building, Sixth and Locust streets, St. Louis, Mo. Dear Sir Your favor for principal and interest is received, with inclosures. Papers will be sent as soon as received from the East. Central Trust Co. St. Louis, Feb. 25, 1894." During the time of the existence of this company the above form was used at each and every remittance by appellee, and prior to that time the same form was used by the Wilson & Toms Investment Company, which was succeeded by the Central Trust Company, by a reorganization. Long prior to the making of the note and mortgage in controversy herein, the appellee had purchased other land in Boone county from the appellant had given a note and mortgage for part of the purchase price thereof, and it had been made payable at and paid to the Wilson & Toms Investment Company, St. Louis, Mo., except the last payment of interest and principal, which was paid to the Central Trust Company, they having at the time possession of the note, mortgage, and satisfaction thereof. In all the foregoing payments of interest except the last on the four hundred dollar mortgage note, the appellant remitted to the St. Louis company the amount due, and they in turn remitted the same to appellant, and he then sent the interest coupon to them, and they in turn sent the same to the appellee. In the last instance, the payment of principal and interest in the amount of four hundred and twenty-eight dollars, the appellee sent the amount to the Central Trust Company, received the usual reply that the same had been received, and that the papers would be sent as soon as received from the East, but the Central Trust Company failed to remit the amount, or any part of it, to the appellant, and on the thirty-first day of May, 1894, made an assignment to W. F. Leonard, the secretary of the company. This action was afterwards, on the day of , 189 , begun by the appellee as plaintiff, demanding that the note be canceled, and the mortgage satisfied of record. The appellant interposed his defense, alleging that the note had not been paid, nor the mortgage satisfied, and asking a foreclosure of his mortgage according to the terms thereof, and for judgment against appellee for amount of note, interest, and costs. The district court gave judgment for the plaintiff, and the defendant appealed--Affirmed.

AFFIRMED.

J. M Goodson for appellant.

...