Anderson v. Anderson
| Decision Date | 21 March 1908 |
| Citation | 115 N.W. 836,17 N.D. 275 |
| Parties | ANDERSON v. ANDERSON et al. |
| Court | North Dakota Supreme Court |
Before a conveyance of real property will be set aside as having been given under duress or menace, the proof must be clear, specific, and satisfactory.
Before a deed of real property will be set aside as having been executed through the influence of threats of violence or arrest, the proof must show that the deed was executed under the influence of such threats, and while the will was overcome by reason of such threats or duress or menace.
Whether a deed was executed under the influence of threats is a question of fact in all cases depending upon the circumstances of each particular case.
Facts recited in the opinion held to show that a deed was not executed under the influence of threats.
Appeal from District Court, Griggs County; E. T. Burke, Judge.
Action by Anna Marie Anderson against Anton Anderson and others. Judgment for defendants, and plaintiff appeals. Affirmed.Pierce & Tenneson and A. W. Cupler, for appellant. Parks & Olsberg, for respondents.
This is an action brought to set aside and cancel a deed of 480 acres of land situated in Griggs county, N. D., and another deed to certain lots situated in the village of Hannaford, Griggs county, N. D. These deeds were given to the plaintiff by Victor K. Anderson on August 17, 1906. The allegation of the complaint on which the court is asked to set aside said deeds is as follows: “That said deed * * * was procured from this plaintiff by the said Victor K. Anderson representing to her that the conveyance theretofore made could be by legal proceedings set aside and was of no value whatever, and that, unless she consented to such reconveyance, he would immediately cause such legal proceedings to be commenced, and would further cause this plaintiff to be arrested for having fraudulently obtained said conveyances, and by an arrest of her person compel her to make such reconveyance; that the said Victor K. Anderson further informed this plaintiff that unless she would consent to such reconveyance he would cause her bodily harm in that he would cause the premises which the plaintiff then occupied to be set on fire while she was asleep therein, and threatened generally by divers means to take the life of this plaintiff and her minor child; and further called this plaintiff vile and obscene names, and then and there by threats attempted to commit violence upon the person of this plaintiff, all of which kept this plaintiff in fear of bodily harm and great mental anguish, and this plaintiff, by reason of the facts aforesaid, and not otherwise, signed her name to said conveyances.” The answer admits the execution of the deeds to the plaintiff, but alleges that the same were without consideration. It further alleges that these deeds were given under the express understanding that plaintiff was to reconvey the lands thereby conveyed to Victor K. Anderson whenever he should request the same to be done. It further alleges that the deeds which this action is brought to set aside were voluntarily executed and delivered to said Victor K. Anderson, and there is also a denial in the answer that any force or undue influence was used before said deeds were executed. The trial court made findings of fact and conclusions of law for the defendants to the effect that the deeds from the plaintiff to said Victor K. Anderson were freely and voluntarily executed and delivered, and that they were executed without undue influence.
The plaintiff appeals from the judgment entered on the said findings of fact, and demands a trial de novo, under the provisions of section 7229, Rev. Codes 1905. The facts brought out in the evidence are substantially as follows: In the year 1904 Victor K. Anderson's wife died and his children left him. In that year he went to Sweden, and there met the plaintiff, his niece. They entered into a contract there, under which she and her child were to come to North Dakota with him, where she was to keep house for him, and was to be paid therefor by him. She accompanied him to North Dakota and kept house for him, pursuant to the contract. In July, 1905, Victor K. Anderson deeded all his land to her, and also conveyed to her all his personal property. She paid no consideration whatever for these conveyances of property to her. It is well established by the evidence that the property was transferred to her for the purpose of avoiding a levy thereon by a creditor of said Anderson. The plaintiff admits in her testimony that there was no consideration for the transfer of this property to her, and admits that Anderson was the real owner thereof during all this time. He managed the farm and took care of the property the same as though it was his own. He received all the proceeds of the same also. In 1905 the land was rented to a third party, who farmed it. The lease was signed by the plaintiff, but all the terms thereof were arranged by said Anderson. During the summer of 1906 the said Victor K. Anderson was guilty of violence towards the plaintiff, and assaulted her upon one occasion, and she procured his arrest for assault and battery upon her, and he was fined $20 after a trial. The said Victor K. Anderson, during the summer of 1906, brought an action against the plaintiff in this case to compel her to reconvey to him the land and property which he had previously transferred to her. The plaintiff employed counsel to defend said suit, and while the suit was pending the parties met and agreed that the said Victor K. Anderson should convey all of his land to the plaintiff for the sum of $5,000, and that the plaintiff should execute to the said Victor K. Anderson a mortgage upon said land and nine promissory notes. No cash was paid upon this transaction, and the notes were never delivered to Anderson, but were placed in the hands of a third party to be held until the title to the lands was shown to be free and clear of all incumbrances and a certain lis pendens released of record. The date of these deeds and mortgage was the 17th day of August, 1906. As matters now stood, the plaintiff had the record title of all these lands by two separate deeds. The plaintiff went into possession of the land after these last deeds were delivered, and Victor K. Anderson requested to be allowed to remain in the house for a few days until he had settled his...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Security State Bank v. Rettinger
...We believe it is conceded that, to set aside the mortgage, the evidence must be clear, satisfactory, and convincing. In Anderson v. Anderson, 17 N.D. 275, 115 N.W. 836, is said: "The burden is upon her to show that the deed was not her free and voluntary act. The presumption is that the dee......
-
Lee v. Lee
... ... having been given under duress and fraud, the proof must be ... clear, specific, and satisfactory. Anderson v. Anderson ... et al., 17 N.D. 275, 115 N.W. 836, followed ... 5. The ... mere fact that a parent deeds property to a child ... ...
-
Lee v. Lee, 6664.
...will be set aside as having been given under duress and fraud, the proof must be clear, specific, and satisfactory. Anderson v. Anderson et al., 17 N.D. 275, 115 N.W. 836, followed. 5. The mere fact that a parent deeds property to a child does not of itself raise a presumption of undue infl......
-
Hendrickson v. Syverson
...v. Lee, 10 N.D. 160, 86 N.W. 714. For other cases of similar import see Mechtle v. Topp, 78 N.D. 789, 52 N.W.2d 842. Anderson v. Anderson, 17 N.D. 275, 115 N.W. 836, involved an action to set aside a deed to real property as having been executed through the influence of threats of violence ......