Hanner v. Greensboro Building & Loan Ass'n, 78 N.C. 188 (1878)

Jan. 1878 · Supreme Court of North Carolina

78 N.C. 188

NATHAN HANNER and another v. THE GREENSBORO BUILDING AND LOAN ASSOCIATION.

Building and Loan Association — Construction of Mortgage.

Under a mortgage executed to a Building and Loan Association by a stockholder to secure a loan of money, it was held, that only the . actual amount loaned and interest thereon and such sum as had been paid by the Association for insurance was collectible; and in such case the mortgagor was( entitled to be credited with the actual amount paid by him as installments.

Civil Action tried at. December Special Term, 1877, of Guildford Superior Court, before Buxton, J.

This action was brought by the plaintiffs against the defendants, Madison Graves and the Building and Loan Asso-' ciation of Greensboro, for a specific performance of a contract, of sale by said Graves of an undivided half of certain real estate, the other half having been mortgaged by him to-defendant association to secure a. loan of $500. The plaintiffs asked for a sale of the whole of the land and a division of the proceeds between the parties entitled. Nelly Graves-,, claiming to be the vendee of Madison’s interest in the half mortgaged as aforesaid, was made a party defendant, and pending the action, she contracted to sell the same to one Hugh Wilson. And thereupon the plaintiffs no longer desiring a sale agreed with Wilson to hold and use the same as partnership property. Wilson then filed a petition in the cause (to relieve said half from said mortgage) in which he alleged that said association held a mortgage upon his interest in said land to the amount of $500, and that Nelly Graves had executed to him a bond for title to said land, he agreeing to pay $1800 therefor, $900 of which had been paid, and the balance payable in installments. And he asked to be made a party plaintiff, and that the amount due upon the mortgage may be ascertained and paid under the order of the Court, so as to enable him and said plaintiffs to perfect their agreement to operate the mills on said premises as partners, and to get a title for his part of the land bought as aforesaid. The prayer of this petition was allowed and the case referred; and in the statement set out in the report of the Referee, it was found that the amount of the several incumbrances on the land was $325,56, as follows:

To amount mortgage to association $500

“ “ pd. insurance on building 12

“ “ decree in favor of I). & D. 100

By . “ installments pd. association by

Nelly Graves $248

“ interest on same 38,44

“ “ to balance 325.56

$612,00 $612,00

The defendant association claiming a greater amount as being due them excepted to the report, and insisted that the sum due them under their regulations on account of the transactions had with Madison Graves who had been an owner of stock therein, was $365,56, as follows :

To amount of loan $500

“ “ difference on shares 140

“ “ pd. for insurance 12

“ installments pd. $248 By

" interest on same 38,44. ic

“ to balance 365,56

$652.00 $652.00

The'$140 as stated was claimed as the difference between the amount at which Graves’ shares were sold, ($500,), and their present value under the regulations of .the association ($640), being $35 on each share. The exceptions were, overruled, and it was ordered that the report be confirmed From this ruling the defendant association appealed.

No counsel for plaintiffs.

Messrs. Scott Caldwell, for defendant association.

Mr. J. T. Morehead, for defendant Graves.

Reade, J.

The report of the Referee gives to the defendant association the amount of money loaned, $500, and interest thereon, and the amount expended for insurance, deducting only what was actually paid as installments. We do not think this is subject to any exception.

A point was made in the argument as to the status of Madison Graves in the association, and the terms of his reinstatement. That is not involved in the report and exceptions, and therefore we do not consider it.

There is no error in the report, or in the order confirming it. This will be certified to the end, that there may be the proper orders for the satisfaction of the mortgage, and for the title to the purchaser, &c.

•No error.

Per Curiam. Judgment affirmed.