109 Iowa 103 | Iowa | 1899
On and prior to January 1, 1891, O. L. Jlund was in business at Algona., Iowa; as a real estate and
The controlling point in the case is Lund’s authority to receive payment of the note held by plaintiff. The loan represented by that note was procured through Lund. The
As the authority of Lund is shown entirely by correspondence, we quote therefrom as follows: Under date of January 24, 1891, Townsend wrote Lund as follows: “I will take the loan on the Danforth land for $800.00, and release any mortgage, and pay the difference. If I understand you right, the land was sold for $30.00 per acre. Do you have many sales at that price? You may make the loan on the Danforth land to Daniel Pierce.” The Danforth land is the land owned by Studer, and the eight hundred dollar mortgage referred to in this letter is the mortgage in suit. Acting under this authority, Lund made the loan to Studer, and sent the note and mortgage to plaintiff, to take the place of what is known as the Danforth note for five hundred dollars; and plaintiff paid Lund the difference between the two loans by draft. It will thus be seen that Lund had express authority from- plaintiff to make the Studer loan. And it also appears from the correspondence that Lund was making many other
As to the authority of Lund to collect principal and interest, we collect the following statements from the correspondence between Townsend and Lund: July 22, 1895, Townsend
As plaintiff’s note was paid by and through the loan negotiated through Lund with the Connecticut Life Insurance Company, he has no right to foreclose his mortgage, for it has been satisfied. And, as the loan is thus discharged, there is