182 Ind. 333 | Ind. | 1914
Suit to recover on a promissory note for $10,000, dated April 5, 1906, payable to A. T. Bowen & Company plaintiffs, purporting to have been executed by The Muncie Gas Light and Fuel Company and endorsed by Charles E. Ruger, Robert H. Adams, W. R. McKeen, Charles A. Meeker, J. F. Marks, N. W. Box and Hiram Kerlin. The original defendants were The Muncie Gas Light and Fuel Company, Ruger as receiver of The Muncie Gas Light and Fuel Company, and the above mentioned endorsers except Kerlin, who had died, and whose executor was made a party defendant. Before the issues were closed Marks and Meeker died and the administrators of their estates were made defendants, and after trial, but before finding, upon the suggestion of the death of Robert H. Adams, the administrator of his estate was substituted as defendant. Before trial the case was dismissed as to Ruger, as receiver of The Muncie Gas Light and Fuel Company.
As the result of numerous pleadings the issues that were formed and tried were as follows: (a) As between the plaintiffs and the defendants there were general denials of all of the allegations of the complaint, answers of no -consideration for the note sued on, and a denial under oath by The Muncie Gas Light and Fuel Company of its execution; (b) issues of suretyship arising upon the cross-complaint of McKeen setting up that he was surety for all his codefendants; (e) issues of suretyship presented by the cross-complaint of Kerlin, executor, setting up that his decedent, Hiram Kerlin, was surety for all the other endorsers on the
McKeen’s motion for a new trial was overruled, and he alone appealed. The only error assigned is the ruling on said motion, which was grounded on the insufficiency, in law and fact, of the support of the decision by the evidence. No question is presented in relation to the form of the judgment against the personal representatives, and no cross errors are assigned.
In 1902, The Muncie Natural Gas Company, a corporation, was engaged in furnishing natural gas to the citizens of Muncie, and its capital stock was owned by Theodore F. Eose and Abbot II. Johnson. The Muncie Gas Company was a corporation theretofore engaged in furnishing artificial gas in the same city. The Wabash Oil and Gas Company, a corporation, owned oil and gas leases in Delaware County and supplied natural gas to the manufacturing plant
The Wabash Oil and Gas Company was endeavoring to raise $20,000 by sale or pledge of its bonds, and employed Adams, on a commission contract, in such effort. Adams consulted MeKeen about the matter and was referred to N. W. Hands & Company, but that firm refused to handle a bond sale for so small an amount. It was then reported that the plant of the Muncie Natural Gas Company could be purchased for about $500,000 cash, that of the Wabash Oil and Gas Company for $100,000, and that of the Muncie Gas Company for $10,000. Adams, Meeker and N. W. Harris & Co. thereupon formed a plan to organize a new company, with a capital of $1,000,000 divided in 4,000 shares of the preferred stock and 6,000 shares of common, with shares of each of the par value of $100. It was not the purpose to pay in any of the capital, but it was intended that the properties of the three existing corporations should be acquired by the new one, and part payment for the purchase should be made by the sale of mortgage bonds of the new company, in the sum of $250,000, which N. W. Harris & Co. agreed to take at 92 cents on the dollar. Wizen it came to closing the deal, it was found that $540,000 must be paid for the property of the Muncie Natural Gas Company on the following terms: $50,000 cash, $200,000 in about 30 days, $100,000 in about three months, and $190,000 in about five months; also, that no transfer would be made until $250,000 should have been paid. Thereupon the directors of the Wabash company
Pursuant to the agreement, preferred and common stock certificates were issued in the name of Meeker, and by him endorsed in blank, and these were delivered to the Muneie Natural Gas Company as collateral, to secure the payment of a note for $100,000, and another for $190,000, due respectively May 1, and July 1, 1903, executed by Adams and
Counsel for appellant vigorously assails the testimony of Adams and claims that it does not support the finding of the trial court that appellant ever agreed to purchase the preferred stock, and suggests not only the improbability of the truth of Adams’ story but points out that many statements in his cross-examination are in apparent conflict with those made on direct examination. Our attention is urged to the fact that no written memorandum corroborates Adams’ testimony, but that on the other hand every writing admitted in evidence is in accord with the theory that no such agreement was made. The trial court alone had the power to weigh the evidence and determine the facts from the evidence adduced and to reconcile or disregard conflicting statements of any witness. Peabody-Alwert Coal Co. v. Yandell (1913), 179 Ind. 222, 100 N. E. 758. In cases of this character no power has ever been conferred on our sourts of review to determine the facts, and interference with the finding below must be predicated on an entire absence of evidence to support it. "We cannot say that the truth of Adams’ story is impossible, and even were we to concede the extreme improbability of its truth that is claimed by appellant’s counsel, we would yet be without rightful power to set aside the finding. Mr. McKeen was not offered as a witness to refute the evidence of Adams. Indeed, he was not present at the trial. There is some controversy between counsel as to the competency of appellant to testify, because Marks, Meeker and Kerlin, who
Appellant’s counsel contends that, conceding that appellant agreed in 1903 to pay the debt evidenced by the note in suit, in consideration of the transfer to him of the preferred stock, the evidence must be held as proving that such agreement was afterwards rescinded. We do not deem it necessary to set out the items of evidence which appellant’s counsel claims supports this proposition. What we have said in relation to the proof of the agreement is equally applicable here. Adams testified that on May 27, 1903, when McKeen delivered drafts in part payment of the $100,000 note, some of the preferred stock was delivered to him in pursuance of the agreement. Evidently the trial court believed this statement and believed Adams’ explanation of the reasons for the execution of the notes given by Adams and Meeker for the sums paid by McKeen. However improbable the truth of this explanation may appear to appellant’s counsel or might appear to this court, it seems to have convinced the trial court of its truthfulness, and we are precluded from interfering with the finding. Inasmuch as there was some evidence to support the finding by the trial court of facts which justified the conclusion that appellant was primarily liable for the payment of the note, it is unnecessary to consider other questions presented by appellant’s counsel.
The death of appellant is suggested and the judgment is affirmed as of the date of submission.
Note. — Reported in 106 N. E. 529. See, also, under (1) 3 Cyc. 360; (2) 2 Cyc. 698.