Viewpoint

Rodney G. Bryson, Judge.

Sawyer A. Smith for appellant.

Rouse, Cost Adams for appellee.

VIEW OF THIS COURT BY JUDGE RATLIFF

Really appellant, J.M. Crowe, was the owner of 5/20 (1/4) in the stock of the Barrington Woods Realty Company, a corporation, hereinafter called the realty company. On March 22, 1922, the realty business lent of appellee, The Covington believe and financial providers, hereinafter called the financial, the sum of the $13,000 evidenced by thirteen $1,000 notes payable on or before three years after date, and secured exact same by a first mortgage from the belongings of the realty company. Ahead of the mortgage ended up being consummated, besides the mortgage from the home, the stockholders of this realty company, including appellant, accomplished and delivered to the bank the subsequent publishing:

“This Arrangement Witnesseth:

“That, while, The Barrington forests Realty organization, an enterprise within the statutes for the State of Kentucky, is actually desirous of obtaining from The Covington discount Bank and count on providers, of Covington, Kentucky, that loan from inside the amount of $13,000.00, said financing is protected by a home loan regarding land of said Realty organization in Kenton region, Kentucky, and

“while, the stated Covington benefit Bank and rely on Company try ready to create mentioned loan, given most of the stockholders of said Realty business agree in writing towards the execution of financial securing said loan, and further accept to indemnify said Savings lender and depend on Company against any control, price or expense by reason of the generating of said loan;

“today, consequently, in consideration regarding the generating of said financing by stated discount Bank and rely on business to said Realty team, the undersigned, becoming all stockholders of said Realty organization, perform hereby consent to the performance of said mortgage and additional say yes to secure the stated The Covington Savings Bank and believe team as well as benign from any loss, expense or expenditure that’ll occur by reasons on the giving of said loan, said warranty in percentage into holdings with the several stockholders in said www.yourloansllc.com/personal-loans-ar Realty Company, the following:

Once the records developed on March 22, 1925, they were perhaps not paid or revived and evidently little ended up being accomplished concerning the thing until on or just around March 25, 1929, from which opportunity, with no involvement or actions for appellant, others stockholders from the realty team therefore the financial made funds in regard to the notes executed in 1922 and other things. The result of the payment got your realty company executed on bank ten $1,000 brand-new records due and payable 36 months from date, or March 25, 1932, and terminated or noted settled the outdated records, and also the mortgage that was distributed by the realty team to protect the old notes representing the 1922 $13,000 mortgage was launched by lender in margin of the home loan guide where it had been tape-recorded at work of Kenton district judge clerk, and realty company performed on the lender a unique mortgage on the belongings to protected the repayment in the $10,000 newer notes executed March 25, 1929, which financial had been properly tape-recorded during the state judge clerk’s workplace.

After ten $1,000 records performed on March 25, 1929, developed on March 25, 1932, no energy was created of the lender to get the notes by property foreclosure process regarding the mortgage or perhaps and obviously nothing ended up being complete in regards to the procedure until 1938 whenever bank prosecuted the realty providers to collect the $10,000 mortgage produced in March, 1929, also to foreclose the home loan executed by the realty providers to protect the repayment of the identical. Wisdom was made in favor of the financial institution in addition to mortgaged property purchased sold to satisfy the wisdom, interest and value, etc., that has been accomplished, but during those times the assets regarding the realty business are inadequate to meet the view together with lender understood just a small part of its financial obligation, making an equilibrium of $8,900 unpaid. In 1940 the bank produced this course of action contrary to the appellant declaring your $10,000 loan created by they towards the realty team in 1929 was only a renewal or expansion regarding the earliest $13,000 loan made in 1922 and looked for to recuperate of appellant 5/20 or 1/4 associated with the $8,900, or $2,225, deficit that was appellant’s proportionate show for the original $13,000 mortgage built in 1922 in crafting closed by appellant in 1922 regarding the the original loan.