Ross v. Haddam State Bank

Citations

• 113 Kan. 213
• 214 P. 94
• 1923 Kan. LEXIS 365

Syllabus

<p>SYLLABUS BY THE COURT.</p> <p>1. Contract — Services jor Labor on Farm — Contract Construed. A contract between a bank holding a chattel mortgage and the mortgagor, by which it allowed the property covered to remain in his possession on his farm under an arrangement that a part of the proceeds were to apply upon the indebtedness, and that the bank was to advance $50 a month for the payment of a person named, for labor on the farm, is held under the evidence to authorize such laborer to maintain an action against the bank for payment for his services on that basis.</p> <p>2. Same. A clause of the contract making the bank the judge of the necessity of certain expenses is held not to apply to the laborer’s compensation.</p> <p>3. Same. If the contract referred to was contrary to the statute forbidding a bank to “employ its moneys, directly or indirectly, in trade or commerce, by buying and selling goods,” and requiring it to dispose of chattels in its possession as soon as possible, that did not justify the bank in refusing to pay the laborer for services actually rendered. Nor did any breach of the contract on the part of the mortgagor relieve the bank from liability to the laborer, so long as it permitted the arrangement to remain in operation, and he continued to perform the services.</p>