Crowe v. Covington rely on financial Co. charm from Kenton Circuit Court; common-law and money Division.


Rodney G. Bryson, Assess.

Sawyer A. Smith for appellant.

Rouse, Cost Adams for appellee.


The appellant, J.M. Crowe, ended up being the owner of 5/20 (1/4) with the inventory of the Barrington forests Realty organization, an organization, hereinafter known as realty business. On March 22, 1922, the realty business borrowed of appellee, The Covington depend on and financial providers, hereinafter known as lender, the sum of the $13,000 evidenced by thirteen $1,000 notes payable on or before 3 years after big date, and guaranteed exact same by an initial home loan about residential property from the realty business. Prior to the mortgage had been consummated, as well as the mortgage about land, the stockholders in the realty company, including appellant, performed and shipped to the financial institution the following writing:

“This Contract Witnesseth:

“That, Whereas, The Barrington Woods Realty organization, an organization beneath the guidelines of the county of Kentucky, are desirous of getting through the Covington Savings Bank and believe team, of Covington, Kentucky, that loan when you look at the sum of $13,000.00, mentioned financing are guaranteed by a mortgage about property of said Realty organization in Kenton region, Kentucky, and

“Whereas, the stated Covington economy lender and rely on organization try prepared to generate stated loan, offered all stockholders of said Realty organization concur on paper towards the execution of home loan securing stated financing, and further say yes to indemnify said Savings Bank and believe business against any reduction, cost or expenditure by factor with the generating of said financing;

“today, consequently, in factor of the generating of said financing by mentioned benefit Bank and depend on business to stated Realty business, the undersigned, being most of the stockholders of said Realty business, carry out hereby consent towards delivery of said financial and additional agree to contain the said The Covington cost savings Bank and believe Company as well as ordinary from any reduction, cost or cost which will occur by explanation for the granting of said financing, mentioned promise in percentage on the holdings on the a number of stockholders in said Realty Company, as follows:

Whenever records developed on March 22, 1925, they were maybe not compensated or restored and it seems that nothing got finished in regards to the issue until on or just around March 25, 1929, at which opportunity, with no participation or action on the part of appellant, another stockholders regarding the realty company and lender made money regarding the notes executed in 1922 as well as other things. The result of the settlement ended up being that the realty providers performed to the lender ten $1,000 latest records due and payable 36 months from time, or March 25, 1932, and terminated or designated paid the old notes, together with home loan that was provided by the realty providers to secure the existing notes representing the 1922 $13,000 financing premiered because of the lender in the margin with the financial book where it had been recorded at the office in the Kenton county judge clerk, and realty team performed towards financial a new home loan on their home to protected the payment for the $10,000 brand-new notes performed March 25, 1929, which mortgage got properly tape-recorded within the district judge clerk’s office.

When the ten $1,000 records accomplished on March 25, 1929, matured on March 25, 1932, no work was developed by the lender to get the notes by property foreclosure proceedings in the financial or otherwise and obviously absolutely nothing got done about the matter until 1938 as soon as the financial charged the realty providers to get the $10,000 mortgage built in March, 1929, in order to foreclose the financial executed by realty providers to protected the installment of the identical. Judgment is rendered and only the bank in addition to mortgaged property bought offered to meet the judgment, interest and cost, etc., that was done, but during those times the possessions regarding the realty team had been insufficient to satisfy the judgment plus the lender knew only a tiny part of its debt, leaving an equilibrium of $8,900 delinquent. In 1940 the bank brought this action against the appellant claiming that the $10,000 loan made by it to the realty company in 1929 was only a renewal or extension of the original $13,000 loan made in 1922 and sought to recover of appellant 5/20 or 1/4 of the $8,900, or $2,225, deficit which was appellant’s proportionate share of the original $13,000 loan made in 1922 under the writing signed by appellant in 1922 in connection with the original loan.

Strickland Law Firm

Criminal defense lawyers in Houston come a dime a dozen. So why choose
Strickland Law Firm ?

Our clients hire us as their criminal defense lawyers because we truly care about the outcomes that we’re able to get in court for our clients.

Our clients are facing dire situations and need someone to fight for them. We practice great care when undertaking a case to ensure that each person receives the respect, discretion and vigorous defense they deserve. We know that legal matters don’t impact just the defendant and the defendant’s ability to go to work and get a high-paying job or be considered for dream opportunities, but they also impact the defendant’s family.

When we take on a criminal defense case, we see humans who’ve made mistakes and need a chance to redeem themselves.

When you choose Strickland Law Firm as your criminal defense lawyers, we will work hard to make sure that you are heard not only in the court, but in our office because you will be part of our family.

Years Experience