Norelius v. Home Savings Bank

203 N.W. 809, 200 Iowa 613
CourtSupreme Court of Iowa
DecidedMay 15, 1925
StatusPublished
Cited by2 cases

This text of 203 N.W. 809 (Norelius v. Home Savings Bank) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Iowa primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Norelius v. Home Savings Bank, 203 N.W. 809, 200 Iowa 613 (iowa 1925).

Opinion

De Graff, J.

This is an action in equity. The relief sought is the cancellation of two written instruments which *614 plaintiff, as guardian, alleges were executed May 14, 1921, by his mentally incompetent ward, Albert Johnson, through the fraud and conspiracy of the defendants. The instruments consist of a promissory note for $5,242.36, payable to the defendant Home Savings Bank of Kiron, Iowa, and an indorsement to said bank of a $14,000 note, payable to Albert Johnson and signed by John P. Turin, as maker.

The primary questions on this appeal present issues of fact, which may be stated interrogatively as follows: Was Albert Johnson of unsound mind at the time he executed the note to the defendant bank and made the indorsement of the Turin note? Does the evidence warrant an affirmative finding that the defendants are chargeable with fraud and conspiracy? Are the signatures of the ward to the instruments involved herein forgeries ?

The trial court answered affirmatively the first two questions, and deemed it unnecessary to rule the third. We will, therefore, confine this review to the correctness of the findings made.

It is impossible to portray adequately in opinion the impressions received from a careful reading of the entire record; nor is it possible, in a case of this character, within the reasonable limits of an opinion, to recite the evidence in detail.

It may also be stated that, in reaching a correct conclusion on the issues, we cannot divorce the facts bearing on the mental condition of the ward from other facts and circumstances which tend to prove that an imposition was practiced upon him.

The facts disclose that, on May 20, 1921, a few days subsequently to the transaction which gave rise to the instant suit, Albert Johnson was declared by the commissioners of insanity of Crawford County, Iowa, to be a person of unsound mind, and was committed to the hospital for the insane at Clarinda, Iowa. On September 7, 1921, G. A. Norelius was duly appointed, under order of the district court of Iowa in and for Crawford' County, Iowa, guardian of the person and property of said Albert Johnson, and qualified as such guardian.

A brief introduction to the parties defendant in this case is necessary. The Home Savings Bank of Kiron, Iowa, is a corporation organized under the banking laws of Iowa. M. P. *615 Swanson was its acting president, and C. S. Johnson its cashier. Oscar and Aaron Sederberg were brothers, and were severally indebted to the Home Savings Bank in a considerable sum of money. The bank was pressing them for payment of this indebtedness, and efforts were made by them to renew the loan at the bank, which being refused, other parties were interviewed, for the purpose of negotiating new loans. Both the Sederbergs were insolvent at this time. Their financial difficulties were talked over by them with Albert Johnson; and as their friend, he became interested in their behalf, to the extent that he promised to assist Aaron in borrowing money in the amount of $1,500, and agreed to sign a note with Oscar Sederberg to secure a loan whereby the indebtedness of Aaron to the defendant bank could be paid. Several parties were interviewed, without success. On May 11, 1921, Albert and Oscar went to Ida Grove, to borrow this money, and it appears that the bank at that place agreed to make the loan; but, without consummating the deal, Albert and Oscar returned home, the same evening.

.The first chapter of the history of the defendant bank with this transaction begins at this point; but before detailing the record facts in this particular, we turn to the evidence bearing on the mental incompetency of Albert Johnson. This is a material inquiry.

It is to be observed that Albert Johnson was adjudicated by a competent tribunal to be of unsound mind, within a week subsequent to the transaction in question. The record is replete with occurrences that indicate that Johnson was weak-minded and. suffering from hallucinations. His peculiar and nonnormal acts had been a matter of common observance and the subject of considerable comment. He was seen a number of times, late at night, cleaning the street crossings, with which he had no concern. He imagined that he talked with his mother, who had died about a year previously. He claimed that his mother told him what he should do, and that, as long as he wore the sweater which she had mended, no one could injui’e or wrong him. He had an obsession that the doctor who attended his mother during her last sickness killed her. He told a great many people that he was a detective, and the best detective in the country. He also claimed that he “would get” certain fellows whom he *616 did not like, on the 4th day of July, for the reason that “that was a free day, and anybody could shoot on that day. ’ ’ He labored under the impression that he could not lose money if he kept “the numbers,” and in one instance, hid a $10 bill in a coal bucket, which was afterwards found and returned to him, as the clerk in the store where he had hidden the money had kept the numbers on the bill, at Johnson’s request. On one occasion, when a friend of his was about to be taken to Omaha for a surgical operation, he became greatly excited, and “acted like a crazy man.” He drew a check on the 14th day of May, 1921, on the Home Savings Bank for $2,000, for the purpose of making a loan of that sum to one Nordell. He had no money on deposit in this bank; and it is shown that the payee concluded the same day that Johnson was of unsound mind, based on his actions and conduct at that time, and as a result, Nordell destroyed the check and canceled the note. Johnson was not a user of intoxicants, and his peculiar actions are not explainable on any occasion by reason of his drinking alcoholic beverages. He also told several persons that he was afraid that a man by the name of Bill Horan would poison one of his horses. On another occasion, he seemed to think that somebody was after him, and while in one of the stores in Kir on, acted very queerly, and asked the wife of the storekeeper if, he had done anything wrong. He imagined, by reason of the ringing of the telephone, that somebody was making inquiry concerning him. His physical condition was also observed. He had a wild stare in his eyes. It is also shown that he would buy cigars and throw them, one at a time, as far as he could, and. buy more and repeat the act. At times he would cry, for a considerable period of time. His talk at times was very foolish. He would talk to himself. His actions became so pronounced that it became a subject of public comment, and it was suggested to the authorities that something should be done. It was talked over in the town council meeting, but no action was taken by that body.

When he would talk about his being a detective, he would say: “If I wasn’t down town nights, the town would be bio wed up.” This happened at least two weeks before he was taken to Clarinda. He also claimed, as a detective, that he could trace anything, and that he intended to purchase some bloodhounds.

*617 On one occasion he handed a slip of paper to a man named Salmonson, and said: “If you don’t give it back, I -will lose $500.” What was written on the paper was only partly intelligible.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Sjulin v. Clifton Furniture Co.
41 N.W.2d 721 (Supreme Court of Iowa, 1950)
Kressler v. Flynn
83 N.E.2d 876 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1949)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
203 N.W. 809, 200 Iowa 613, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/norelius-v-home-savings-bank-iowa-1925.