American Nat. Bank v. Bradford

Decision Date24 February 1945
Citation188 S.W.2d 971,28 Tenn.App. 239
PartiesAMERICAN NAT. BANK v. BRADFORD.
CourtTennessee Court of Appeals

Rehearing Denied March 31, 1945.

Certiorari Denied by Supreme Court June 30, 1945.

Appeal from Chancery Court, Davidson County; Thomas A. Shriver Chancellor.

Suit by American National Bank, as guardian of Mrs. Sammie Mays Bradford, a mental incompetent, against Mrs. Sammie Mays Bradford, who after commencement of suit was adjudged restored in mind, to sell certain real estate belonging to incompetent to pay for her maintenance in a state hospital and for expenses of guardianship wherein the State intervened. From an adverse decree, defendant appeals.

Affirmed and remanded.

W. A. Build and C. H. Rutherford, both of Nashville, for appellant.

Bass Berry & Sims and James W. Stokes, all of Nashville, for appellee.

FELTS Judge.

The American National Bank, guardian of Mrs. Sammie Mays Bradford, a mental incompetent, brought this suit to sell her real estate to pay for her maintenance at the Central State Hospital for the Insane and other expenses of the guardianship. The chancellor decreed this relief. Mrs Bradford, having meanwhile been adjudged restored in mind, appealed from the chancellor's decree. The pertinent facts are these:

Mrs. Bradford, age 63, and her husband, age 80, were living on her farm in Davidson County. She had trouble with some of her neighbors, and one of them had her arrested on a peace warrant. She made bond, returned home, and that night his home was burned. The State fire marshal and officers investigating the fire caused her to be arrested on the charge of arson. While she was in jail on this charge her brother, S. L. Mays, undertook to assist her and employed a lawyer, Mr. James W. Stokes, who advised him to have her examined as to her mental condition. He had such an examination made by Dr. J. P. Gilbert, a psychiatrist, and Dr. J. J. Lentz, health officer of Davidson County. They reported she was insane and should be confined in an institution for the care of the insane.

Mays thereupon instituted an inquisition of lunacy in the County Court of Davidson County. Upon the hearing on June 7, 1938, that court adjudged Mrs. Bradford to be insane, committed her to the Central State Hospital as a private pay patient, Code, § 4440, and appointed the American National Bank as her guardian, Id. § 4478. There was no appeal from that judgment, she was taken to the Central State Hospital, and the charge of arson was dropped.

She had two adjacent tracts of land totaling 148 acres and a small amount of personalty consisting of $81.12 in bank, $150 in United States bonds, some household goods, farming implements, and livestock. The guardian took charge of this property; and, under an order of the county court, sold the goods, implements, and livestock for a total of $366.30. The charge for her maintenance at the hospital was $100 each quarter payable in advance. The guardian paid this and other expenses until it appeared the fund would soon become exhausted.

Attending physicians advised that Mrs. Bradford was incurably insane but otherwise in good health and would probably live many years in her condition requiring continued maintenance and support of her at the Central State Hospital. She had no child and her husband was unable to provide for her support and maintenance. So on November 2, 1938, the guardian filed the original bill in the present suit, setting out these matters, exhibiting its account showing a balance of $286.69 in its hands, and alleging that the attorney's fee in the lunacy proceeding and other expenses of the guardianship had not been paid. The bill also alleged that the ward's land had not been cultivated in several years, had grown up in bushes and trees, was encumbered by unpaid taxes, and was incapable of producing any income; and that it was necessary to sell the land in order to pay the debts already accrued and to provide for the continued support and maintenance of the ward at the Central State Hospital.

Mrs. Bradford, through her husband as next friend, filed a petition December 2, 1938, in the County Court of Davidson County, attacking the lunacy proceeding and the appointment of the guardian and seeking in the alternative to be adjudged restored in mind and released from the hospital. Finding her still insane, the county judge dismissed her petition. She appealed to the circuit court and that court dismissed her appeal upon the ground that it should have been to the Court of Appeals. The Supreme Court reversed and remanded for a hearing on the merits. Bradford v. Ragsdale, 174 Tenn. 450, 126 S.W.2d 327, 121 A.L.R. 1506. There was such a hearing February 26, 1940, the jury found her sane, and the court adjudged that she be restored as sui juris and released, that she settle with her guardian, and that it settle with her.

But she did not settle; instead she filed a bill June 6, 1940, in the Chancery Court, Part II, of Davidson County, to have the lunacy proceeding and the appointment of the guardian declared void; to recover of the guardian all that had come into its hands, including what it had paid out for her support and maintenance and for other expenses of the guardianship; and to enjoin it from further prosecuting the present suit, which was pending in the Chancery Court, Part I. The chancellor dismissed her bill and this Court affirmed his decree. Bradford v. American Nat. Bank et al., 25 Tenn.App. 413, 158 S.W.2d 366. Certiorari was denied February 7, 1942.

On February 27, 1942, the guardian filed a supplemental bill in the present case, referring to the other suits and the steps that had been taken in this one, and alleging that the guardian had disbursed all of the ward's personalty except $9; that it was indebted in the sum of $500 to the Central State Hospital for her maintenance and further indebted for other necessary expenses and for costs and attorney's fees in the other litigations; that since her restoration she had refused to pay any of said indebtedness and had sought to avoid payment by mortgaging her land for $800 and later transferring the land to Nevada Lucas, who was joined as a defendant. The prayer was that these conveyances be declared void and that the land, or enough of it, be sold to pay these debts so the guardian could make final settlement.

Mrs. Bradford had answered the original bill August 12, 1940, asserting the guardian's appointment was void and denying its right to prosecute this suit. On April 1, 1942, she demurrer to the supplemental bill and later moved to dismiss the suit. The substance of her demurrer was that her restoration had ended the guardianship and deprived the court of jurisdiction in this cause, that the supplemental bill was multifarious, that there was an adequate remedy at law for enforcement of any of these claims against her which were valid. The ground of the motion to dismiss was that upon her restoration the guardian had no power or duty to do anything except to make final settlement by restoring all of her property to her. The demurrer and motion were overruled with leave to rely on these matters in her answer. She later answered, setting up these same matters and denying that the original or the supplemental bill showed any necessity for a sale of her land.

On August 26, 1942, the State filed an intervening petition asserting its claim for $490, plus interest, for maintenance of Mrs. Bardford at the Central State Hospital. This petition stated that her attorneys had sent to Assistant Commissioner of Institutions a certified check for $250 in full payment of the claim, with a letter stating Mrs. Bradford had sold her farm and nothing could now be made out of her; but that on investigation he had found that the Tennessee Title Company in order to protect itself on its guaranty of the title of the land to the purchaser had required Mrs. Bradford to deposit with it a large part of the proceeds of the sale, including $500 for the State's claim, which sums the company was holding under an escrow agreement; and that therefore the State had declined to accept the check in full of its claim.

On January 4, 1943, Mrs. Bradford answered the petition, reiterating her attack upon the lunacy proceeding and the guardian's appointment as void, and alleging that the State had engaged in a conspiracy to deprive her of her liberty and property by resisting her petition for restoration and having the doctors at the Central State Hospital testify against her in that proceeding; that she was not indebted to the State for keeping her at the Central State Hospital under these circumstances; and that the State had retained the $250 check, which was an accord and satisfaction of the claim.

The cause was heard orally according to the forms of chancery, and the chancellor filed an opinion that complainant was entitled to the relief sought. Accordingly he entered a decree setting out the respective amounts of the debts and directing a sale of the land if they were not paid in 60 days. These debts were: (1) $490 to the State for maintenance of Mrs. Bradford at the Central State Hospital; (2) $500 to James W. Stokes as attorney's fee for representing the guardian from June 7, 1938, to date; (3) $200 as reasonable compensation to the guardian; (4) $90 for premiums paid by the guardian for its bond; (5) $150 to Bass, Berry and Sims as an attorney's fee for representing the guardian in Bradford v. American National Bank et al., 25 Tenn.App. 413, 158 S.W.2d 366; (6) $25 to Joe L. Jenkins for services as guardian ad litem in the present cause up to the time of Mrs. Bradford's restoration.

Appellant has assigned numerous errors, which present these propositions: (1) The court had no...

To continue reading

Request your trial
13 cases
  • Clinard v Blackwood
    • United States
    • Tennessee Court of Appeals
    • October 28, 1999
    ...No. 66, 1987 WL 9165, at *4 (Tenn. Ct. App. Apr. 10, 1987), perm. app. denied (Tenn. July 27, 1987); American Nat'l Bank v. Bradford, 28 Tenn. App. 239, 262, 188 S.W.2d 971, 981 (1945); Tenn. S. Ct. R. 8, EC 4-6.(FN32) In fact, they continue after the death of a client or former client. See......
  • Boyce v. LPP Mortg. Ltd., W2012-02725-COA-R3-CV
    • United States
    • Tennessee Court of Appeals
    • November 20, 2013
    ...raising the defense must generally put in evidence the record or a copy of the record of the former case. American National Bank v. Bradford, 28 Tenn. App. 239, 188 S.W.2d 971 (1945). If the record does not conclusively show that a particular matter was determined in the former proceeding, ......
  • Boyce v. LPP Mortg. Ltd.
    • United States
    • Tennessee Court of Appeals
    • April 11, 2014
    ...raising the defense must generally put in evidence the record or a copy of the record of the former case. American National Bank v. Bradford, 28 Tenn.App. 239, 188 S.W.2d 971 (1945). If the record does not conclusively show that a particular matter was determined in the former proceeding, t......
  • Jackson v. Smith
    • United States
    • Tennessee Court of Appeals
    • September 9, 2011
    ...of res judicata must generally put in evidence the record or a copy of the record of the former case. American National Bank v. Bradford, 28 Tenn. App. 239, 188 S.W.2d 971 (1945). If the record does not conclusively show that a particular matter was determined in the former proceeding, the ......
  • 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