Woodruff v. Satterfield

• Decision Date: 05 April 1917
• Docket Number: 8 Div. 999
• Citation: 74 So. 948,199 Ala. 477
• Parties: WOODRUFF v. SATTERFIELD et al.
• Court: Alabama Supreme Court

74 So. 948

199 Ala. 477

WOODRUFF v. SATTERFIELD et al.

8 Div. 999

Supreme Court of Alabama

April 5, 1917

Appeal from Chancery Court, Marshall County; James E. Horton, Jr. Chancellor.

Suit by Lizzie B. Woodruff against J.R. Satterfield and others. From an adverse decree, complainant appeals. Affirmed.

A.E Hawkins, of Albertville, and John A. Lusk & Son, of Guntersville, for appellant.

D Isbell, of Guntersville, for appellees.

THOMAS J.

In the instant case the bill is filed by the wife to cancel a mortgage on an undivided half interest of the wife, with the husband, in the lands described in the bill. It is clear from the pleadings and the proof that the husband and wife jointly acquired the estate by conveyance of date December 29, 1909 from E.W. Haynes and wife, the recited consideration of which was $950. A vendor's lien was retained in Haynes for the balance of the purchase money due by said Woodruffs, and he thereafter transferred to Hooper the mortgage evidencing the same. Thereafter this Haynes-Hooper vendor's lien mortgage was paid from the proceeds of the Satterfield mortgage, cancellation of which is sought. The release of Hooper, of the vendor's lien mortgage, recited the application on the part of W.C. Woodruff, the husband of complainant, for a loan, to be secured by mortgage on said lands, with the further statement that:

"Whereas, I, J.F. Hooper, have a lien on said lands as mortgage; and whereas, said W.R. Nelson has succeeded in negotiating a loan of $650 for said W.C. Woodruff on his land with James Kenan: Now, therefore, in consideration of the payment of $600 to me, which I hereby acknowledge, I hereby release and discharge my said lien as mortgage for $650 on said lands, and agree that W.R. Nelson may also have a prior lien thereon for his fee in the matter."

This release was of date February, 1910. Pursuant to an agreement of record of counsel, it was admitted that the mortgage in question, taken in Mr. James Kenan's name, was sent to Mr. Nelson, and that Mr. Kenan transferred it to Satterfield as shown by transfer thereon, for a valuable consideration, he furnishing the amount for the loan and mortgage, that it belongs to him and not to Kenan, and that "Mr. Satterfield paid off the Hooper mortgage." Mr. Hooper, as a witness for Satterfield, testified that the husband of complainant made an application to the bank for a loan with which to pay Haynes, and, in discussing it, the bank agreed that, if he would execute to E.W. Haynes (meaning complainant's vendor of said land) a mortgage and note for $650, the bank or Hooper would purchase the same on due transfer thereof by said Haynes. This witness further stated that he prepared the mortgage given by complainant and husband to Haynes, and the transfer thereof to Hooper, and that the same was discharged by the payment to him (Hooper) and to Woodruff of the amount agreed on. It is further without conflict in the evidence that Hooper, on the payment of this Haynes mortgage from the proceeds of the Satterfield loan, did not transfer the same to any one; that he "did not cancel it on the record," and had "no recollection of ever authorizing any one to cancel it"; that...