The morning call. [volume] (San Francisco [Calif.]) 1878-1895, 1894-11-29
THE BANK RIGHT
In Selling FriedIander's
Property.
Judge Slack Decides a Complicated
Suit TO Recover Property
Pledged Years Ago.

Judge Slack rendered a valuable decision
yesterday in the suit brought by T Cary Fried
lander as administrator OF The estate of his late
father. Isaac FriedIander, against the Bank of
California and William S. Chapman.
The suit was brought for an accounting from
the bank and Chapman OF the proceeds of the
sale OF certain lands belonging to Isaac Fried
lander. Friedlander, on September 6. 1876,
executed an absolute deed TO "a, $50 acres of
land III MERGED and Fresno counties in favor
OF the Bank OF California. AT the time Isaac
Friedlander was indebted 10 the bank in the
sum of S500,35S 46.
AT the time this deed was given William S,
Chapman, who was interested with Friedlan-
der in certain business speculatiOns. ana who
owed the bank Of California S214,523 81, exc
cuted a similar deed in favor Of the bank TO
$4,000 acres of lana In various PARTS OF the
State. Six promissory notes were drawn up by
Eredlander, made payable TO the order Of
Chapman and Endorsed by him. SIX other
notes w-re executed by Chapman 10 the order
OF Friedlander and Endorsed by him, and all
handed over TO the bank as security. That WAS
not all. friedlander handed over 10 the bank
two nOleS OF Dresbach q Co. for $4,000 each
which belonged To him and Chapman pledged
5000 shares Of stock in the Pioneer Mining
Company.
A deed was shortly afterward drawn up, a
deed To which Friedlander, Chapman and the
bank were parties in which the bank ackDow.
edged the holding OF these securities belonging
10 Frledlander aud Chapman, aud gave an I'M
dertaking TO part with he property only under
certain conditions, OF which default was one.
SO Tor time all was well.
In April, 1877, however, Friedander became
financially embarrassed and elected sort of
settlement with his creditors, in which the bank
mace some concessions. But IN the following
year Isaac Frledlander died iuSolyenI without
having made any fulhlment of bis promises,
and the bank teok possession of the pledged
property.
In 1888 Friedlander's property was sold by
the bank and fetched S87, 2S4 As, which the
colft tnds was reasonable price at that time.
No notice was given TO Chapman OF the sale
Chapman having in 1879 been released from all
oDllEatlonS upon the notes executed by Fried
lander ON consideration OF his giving the bank
an absolute deed TO the lands lie himself had
pledged as security.
Friedlander's executor sued TO set aside the
sale, contending that the property was held in
trust ny inc bank under The deed OF agreement
and al accounting was demanded. Chapman,
who was included With the bank as a defen-
danC, nled cross-complaint. The case look
four weeks TO try and yesterday Judge Slack
decided against Friedlander as against The
bank, but IN favor of Friedlander as against
Chairman on the latter's cross complaint
The court held that If Friedlauder's incebt-
edness had been satisfied In 1879, when Chan
man made bis absolute deed of conveyance "a
The bank. the bank would have had no right tC
sell the property. However, there was eylusnce
To show that while Chapman was released oI
his Obligations, the transaction did not include
Fredander, whose liability remained. 1t was
undIsputed that the proceeds OF the sale were
far below the indebtedness SO no accountInp
could be necessary.
In this way Judge Slack decides that nobody
gels anything, and matters OF difference be.
tween tile Frledlander estate, the Bank OF Cali.
fornia and William 5. Chapman must perforce
remain I'm statu quo.