Ennis v. Burnham

Decision Date12 February 1901
Citation159 Mo. 494,60 S.W. 1103
PartiesENNIS et al. v. BURNHAM et al.
CourtMissouri Supreme Court

A daughter and her husband went to live with her mother and father on the latter's farm, for the purpose of caring for them; the mother being an invalid, and the father aged 78. About three weeks later the son-in-law, accompanied the father to a lawyer's office, and the father, in the absence of the son-in-law, stated he wished a writing drawn, as he was too feeble to care for himself, and he wished to pay his son-in-law to do it. The lawyer suggested that he probably wished a deed, and one was drawn with the provision that, in consideration of one dollar, the son-in-law and his wife should care for the grantor and his wife during their lives. The lawyer read the deed to the grantor twice, because of his hesitation. The lawyer testified that the grantor did not convey to him very clearly whether he wished to convey a fee or the life estate, and the lawyer did not explain that it conveyed a fee. Twelve days later the son-in-law procured a county judge to call at the farm to take the acknowledgment. The mother stated that she knew it was a deed to the place. The farm was worth between $6,000 and $8,000. The support of the grantors was to come largely therefrom, and the father had other children. Held, that the deed would be set aside as procured by undue influence.

Appeal from circuit court, Howard county: John A. Hockaday, Judge.

Suit by Sarah Ennis and others against William B. Burnham and others. From a decree in favor of complainants, defendants Burnham appeal. Affirmed.

A. W. Walker and W. M. Williams, for appellants. Sam C. Major and Crawley & Son, for respondents.

BRACE, P. J.

This is an appeal by the defendants William B. Burnham and his wife, Rhoda M. Burnham, from a decree of the circuit court of Howard county setting aside and annulling a warranty deed executed by Ephraim Snavely and his wife, Julia F. Snavely, parties of the first part, dated April 24, 1895, by them duly acknowledged on the 6th of May, 1895, and filed for record on the 5th of June, 1896, whereby said Snavely and wife conveyed to the said William B. and Rhoda Burnham, parties of the second part, a tract of land containing 189 acres, situate in Howard county, and particularly described in the decree and petition, for the expressed consideration of "one dollar," and the further consideration "that the said W. B. Burnham and Rhoda Burnham, his wife, are to support the parties of the first part for and during their natural lives; in the event of the death of the said Ephraim Snavely or his wife, the said Burnham, if only one be living, or both if both be living, to support the survivor. The said Burnham and his wife are to have possession of the premises from this date, and the support therein referred to begins this day. And both possession and support go together up to the death of the said parties of the first part," — upon the ground, as stated in the decree, "that said Ephraim Snavely at the time of the execution of said deed was an old and decrepit man, feeble in body and mind, and without sufficient mental capacity to fully comprehend the transaction in which he was then engaged; that said deed is not supported by a fair and adequate consideration; and that said deed was procured to be executed by the exercise of undue influence over said Ephraim Snavely by the grantees in said deed named." It appears from the evidence that the said Ephraim Snavely died intestate on the 7th of July, 1896; that he had been twice married; that the plaintiffs are his children and the children of a deceased child by his first wife, and the defendants are his children and the children of a deceased child by his second wife; that for many years prior to the 24th of April, 1895, the said Ephraim had been the owner in fee simple of the land described in the deed aforesaid of that date, and had occupied the same as a homestead on which he had reared his numerous progeny, consisting of ten children (five by his first and five by his second wife), all of whom before that time had grown up, married, and removed from the homestead, leaving him and his second wife, the said Julia, who was then an invalid, and who died in the month of April, 1896, and their hired house servant, the only occupants of the homestead; that at the time of the execution of said deed the said Snavely was about 78 years old; that he had some years before ceased farming the homestead, which was the only real estate he owned, and which was worth between six and eight thousand dollars, disposed of most of his stock and farming implements, and rented the land to tenants, the income from which source, and from some money, — probably about $1,500, — which he had out at interest, provided a sufficient support for himself and wife; that he was then, and for some years previous had been afflicted with chronic diarrhea, a kidney disease, and inflammation of the bladder, that necessitated the drawing of his urine by mechanical means most of the time. These physical ailments grew worse as he grew older, and finally resulted in his death. The effect that they had produced upon his mind and body at the time the deed in question was executed is illustrated by the following extracts from the evidence collated by counsel for the respondents:

Mr. Evans, one of his neighbors, testifies: "I had known Mr. Snavely ever since I was a boy, and that would date back to his manhood in middle life, I suppose; and at that time he was a stout, active man. But two or three years before his death he became infirm, feeble, and very much changed in appearance and capability from what he had been before. He was stooped in form, — very much stooped. His shoulders and neck drooped, he tottered in his walk, and his eye had lost its brilliancy and luster, and he had a stare, — I called it. He would look at you, and his eye was not quick in its movement, as it had been before."

Concerning his mental condition, Dr. Hume says: "This old man's mind seemed to me, until the last few years of his life, remarkably active. But during the last few years of his life I think he was in his dotage. I think for the last three or four years of his life he was evidently in his dotage; and he was debilitated from those diseases, as a man of his age naturally would be, — suffering from those diseases."

Dr. W. C. Harvey, who had known him for 50 years, testifies that up to four or five years before his death Mr. Snavely was a vigorous man, but that during the last three, four, or five years his mind had become so much impaired through the diseases of his body that his mental as well as physical weakness was apparent to one who knew him, without having to converse with him. This witness further considered that Mr. Snavely could be easily influenced during the last years of his life.

Mrs. Evans, a daughter of Mr. Snavely's first marriage, testified: "I noticed that in the latter part of his life he became very quiet, and seemed to be in a deep study all the time, and he didn't have but little to say. If any one would speak to him, sometimes he would wait a second or so before he would answer, and he would look up just as wild out of his eyes. His conversation was just like a child. I noticed it about a year before his death, — a little longer than a year. I guess it was two years before he died that I first noticed it. He didn't talk but very little. He didn't have very much to say. He seemed to be in a deep study pretty much all the time. He would sit still and say nothing and look down to the fire all the time. I noticed that in him so much. He paid no attention to what was going on around him when I was there. Sometimes he would sit in that mood as much as an hour and longer at a time. Then he would get up and go and lie down on the bed. He was not like the same man at all."

Mrs. Hopper, another daughter, testifies: "He had been failing really for four or five years, very fast. He was a stout man, and when he commenced to fail in health he failed very rapidly, — very fast indeed; and he suffered terribly. He began to fail four or five years before he died. I could see the difference the different times I saw him, — that he was failing." The witness then relates a number of incidents, beginning as early as 1894. At one time he would spend an hour in his stable on a hot day, painfully gathering up small wisps of hay from the ground to feed a horse that already stood in easy reach of a large quantity. At another time "he would sit down at the table with mother and me and the girls, and would take the meat dish up in his hands and put all the meat out of the dish on his own plate, and then he would laugh like a real silly person." On yet another occasion, in 1895, after an absence of a couple of weeks, Mrs. Hopper went over to see her father, and he did not recognize her.

Mrs. A. D. Simmons, a near neighbor, testifies to a habit of roving which Mr. Snavely acquired a year or two before his death. She says: "None of the children lived there, but they looked after him all the time; and whenever he was out of his seat they would look after him, and if he was not in sight they would ring the bell, and the neighbors would come and help hunt for him."

Mrs. Sarah Ennis, his eldest daughter, who since 1893 has resided in Nevada, Mo., and saw her father infrequently after that, testifies: "For some two or three years before he died he was a very feeble man. His mental condition was very feeble and childlike. He was old and childish. That is all I can say about him."

Capt. S. B. Cunningham, an acquaintance for 50 years, after describing him as having once been a stout, able-bodied, resolute man, speaks of meeting Mr. Snavely in the summer of 1895 near Mr. Snavely's house. The latter was out in the road, bareheaded, "and seemed to be wild. I spoke to him, as I always had done, but he...

To continue reading

Request your trial
31 cases
  • Cook v. Higgins
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Missouri
    • November 30, 1921
    ...75. (8) Inadequacy of consideration where the parties are not on equal terms is a badge of fraud. Brown v. Slaton, 189 S.W. 1130; Ennis v. Burnham, 159 Mo. 494; Dowell Edwards, 161 S.W. 534; Mott v. Mott, 22 A. 997. (9) There was no reason for making the deed as the old lady's income was su......
  • Ulrich v. Zimmerman
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Missouri
    • July 1, 1942
    ...plaintiffs were entitled to a finding and decree in their favor. Dingman v. Romine, 141 Mo. 466; Martin v. Baker, 135 Mo. 495; Ennis v. Burnham, 159 Mo. 494; Hurley v. Kennally, 206 Mo. 282; Jones v. Belshe, 238 Mo. 524; Cook v. Higgins, 290 Mo. 402; Kroening v. Goehri, 20 S.W. 661; Morris ......
  • Johnson v. Johnson, 7574
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of North Dakota
    • March 18, 1957
    ...629, 86 N.E. 1107, 1109; see also Irwin v. Sample, 213 Ill. 160, 72 N.E. 687; Roby v. Colehour, 135 Ill. 300, 25 N.E. 777; Ennis v. Burnham, 159 Mo. 494, 60 S.W. 1103. In Kirschner v. Kirschner, 113 Mo. 290, 297, 20 S.W. 791, 792 it is 'Where one person has acquired over another a position ......
  • Burgdorf v. Keeven
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Missouri
    • October 4, 1943
    ...of the injured party or his heirs, set the conveyance aside. Cadwallader v. West, 48 Mo. 483; Allore v. Jewell, 94 U.S. 506; Ennis v. Burnham, 159 Mo. 494; McClure Lewis, 72 Mo. 314; Martin v. Baker, 135 Mo. l. c. 504; Kencer v. Kencer, 246 Mo. 419; Soureal v. Wisner, 13 S.W.2d 548; Grundma......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT