Newark evening star and Newark advertiser., 1915-03-20
KOCHER MAKES
FEICK REPORT
Confined from FIRST PaEe.)


sides and Mr.. Kocher received the
case as advisory master.
Many hearings were held, in the
course of which, a number of the ex-
ceptions were allowed, by stipulation,
or the claims modified as to amount.
There were about sixty-eight claims
disposed of in this manner, the total
amount allowed being approximately
$l79,464 The remainder of the eX-
ceptions are disposed of by MIR.
kocher in his report of yesterday
UpholSs Banks Claim.
Chief in Importance in Mr. Kocher's
report Is the overruling of the eXcep-
ton of the executrix to the claim of
the Union National Bank for SIS, 500,
representing notes discounted by it
for Feick. Mr.. Kocher upholds the
bank in applying s23, ,50001 which Feick
had on deposit at the time of his
death, and $26,730 in collateral, to the
payment of the notes.
1t was the contention of the widow
that the bank had no right to apply
the money ON deposit to the payment
of the notes, which did not fall due
until after his death. Mrs. Feick
claimed that the money became part
OF the estate Immediately upon Feick's
the notes should take the same
chances as other claims.
The executrix took exceptions to
the claims for costs and Mr.. Kocher
sustained the exception. BY his rul-
ing the following claims were disal-
lowed: James and Bridget McLaugh-
lin, $3.50; Abner and Patronella Ratz-
wicze, $S9.52. and Amelia and Leonard
Simon, 1921. Mr. Kocher also sus-
tanned exceptions to the claims of
Henry George for $756.97 and August
Bierman for $500 and disallowed the
claims.
Georges claim was for the amount
he declared Feick agreed to pay him
for half interest in a property he
had previously bought from F.
He did not show that Feick ever
agreed to the deal. Bierman wanted
$500 that appeared on Feick's book as
q payment on q mortgage held by
him. 1t was proved that the entry
was made after Feick's death, and
Feick's estate never received any such
sum.
That the bank had the right to set
off against the deposit the amount
of it's claim when the claim was due
is not disputed, Mr. Kocher declares,
but the question whether it had the
right to make such seton when
the debt-the notes-had not yet be-
come due, is more difficult to settle.
There Is no doubt that it could not
be done in an action at law, the mas
ter asserts.
The view supported by the weight
of the authorities, however. SAYS Mr..
Kocher, is that when the estate be-
comes insolvent such condition
gives to the other party the right to
an equitable set-off although th5
debt had not matured.
Rule Sets Precedent In State.
Principles OF equity must govern
the case, he declares. BY his ruling
in this case Mr.. Kocher establishes
a precedent III this State. An In
solvent decedent Is regarded the
same as insolvent corporations, he
holds.
On this theory the bank Is upheld
In applying the money to the pay
ment of it's claims. In regard to the
claim of the bank for the balance
the master recommends that further
testimony be taken to prove that the
executrix had notice Of the protest
ing of the notes when they fell due.
The notes involved are made by the
Hill Bread Company and indorsed
by Feick If 1t is not proved that
the executrix had notice of the dis
honor of these notes the claim OF
the Union Bank will be disallowed as
to them.
Claims by the Essex County Ma
tional Bank for $82 925. the Ironbound
Trust Company for $38.651.68 and the
Fidelity Trust Company for $S2 700,
similar to those of the Union Ma
tional Bank. depended upon the out
come of the latter's claim.
Lawyer Did Large Business.
Mr.. Feick. according to Mr.. Koch
er, did business In obtaining loans
on mortgages that in the eight or
nine years preceding his death ap-
proximated $18 900 600. Feick took
money to be invested, agreeing to
pay per cent. on it from the date
of deposit.
From the fund thus accumulated.
Mr.. Kocher explains, he loaned
money on bond and mortgage, usual
ly taking mortgage in his own name
as mortgage.
large a measure OF confidence in
him." Mr.. Kocher wrote. that they
frequently did not demand possession
of the bond and mortgage wherein
vested. In other cases where such
demand was made, Feick assigned a
bond and mortgage to the amount OF
their deposit with him, in most
cases, however, not notifying the
mortgagor of the assignment.
Frequently mortgagors would come
to Feick and make payment on ac-
count of their mortgage which he
would duly credit upon his books. In
most cases, however, he did not no
tify mortgage of such payment, but
continued to pay him interest on the
full amount of loan. Feick, of course
receiving from mortgagor only in
terest on amount of principal as re-
duced by payments on account. In
effect Feick conducted what was
practically private banking busi-
ness"
Claims Classified.
Mr.. Kocher first divides the various
claims into classes and then proceeds
to make a decision In each class. Ir
the first class he puts those cases
in which the mortgagor, from time Il
time, paid Feick money to be applied
to the reduction of his mortgage
which money Feick failed to turr
over to the mortgage, and in which
the mortgage filed a claim for in
terest on payments from the date OF
payments to the date of Feick's
death.
The master sustains the exceptions
taken by the executrix to these
claims, but allows the claimants in
terest from the time they made thelI
last payment of interest to the time
Feick died. In refusing them interest
on the payments of the principal Mr.
LYoat, ero va tUn raa qnna.
First, the mortgagors have had the
benefit of the reduced interest they
have had to pay on their mortgage
since their reduction of the principal