Arent v. Arent

• Decision Date: 15 June 1948
• Docket Number: 47141.
• Citation: 32 N.W.2d 660,239 Iowa 737
• Parties: ARENT et al. v. ARENT et al.
• Court: Iowa Supreme Court

32 N.W.2d 660

239 Iowa 737

ARENT et al. v. ARENT et al.

No. 47141.

Supreme Court of Iowa

June 15, 1948

Rider & Bastian and Loth & Melton, all of Fort Dodge, for appellant.

Garfield Baker & Miller, of Humboldt, for appellees.

WENNERSTRUM Justice.

Bertha L. H Arent and Asa S. Arent, plaintiffs, are wife and son respectively of the defendant, Asaph Arent. On October 17 1946 the plaintiffs filed a petition wherein it was asked that the wife be appointed guardian of defendant. Arthur Arent, a brother of the defendant, filed a petition of intervention. He approved of the appointment of a guardian but objected to the appointment of the wife claiming she was not a suitable person to act in that capacity. Thereafter pleadings controverting the issues presented in the original petition and in the petition of intervention were filed by the respective parties. On the issues joined by the pleadings a hearing was had. The trial court appointed Bertha L. H Arent as guardian. The intervener has appealed.

It is the contention of the appellant that the court erred in the following respects: (1) in appointing Bertha Arent as guardian rather than some other person, (2) in not requiring plaintiff to prove that she was a suitable person to act as guardian and in appointing her in the absence of such proof, (3) in making the appointment it did inasmuch as it is claimed that the wife appellee had an adverse personal interest and that the effect of this interest was not overcome by any sufficient proof.

The evidence is not controverted that the appellee, Asaph Arent, is now insane and that a guardian should be appointed for him. The sole question on appeal is whether a wife, under these circumstances, is a suitable and proper person to be named as guardian.

Asaph Arent is now approximately 70 years of age. He is a medical doctor who during the greater portion of his professional career has had a large and respected practice in Humboldt, Iowa. He and the appellee, Bertha Arent, have been married for over forty years. There are two living children. Asa Arent, the son and one of the appellees, is a physician in Humboldt. Lillian, a daughter, is now married and lives in Philadelphia. She did not take any part in the proceedings.

The record discloses that the relationship between Bertha Arent and Arthur Arent, the intervener, has not been harmonious for a number of years. He has not been in the home of Bertha and Asaph Arent for approximately twenty-three years. The contentions on the part of the intervener are that Dr. Asaph Arent is now in the hospital for the insane at Cherokee, Iowa, that he is not receiving the proper care there because of the crowded condition of that institution, that he is not being properly clothed, that the ward would be happier and more apt to recover his mental state if he were in a private home or private hospital rather than in a state institution, that Bertha Arent is not showing a proper interest in her husband's condition and welfare, and that she is making no effort to have him released from the state hospital and placed in a private home or in a private institution.

It is a further contention of the intervener that the wife, the appointed guardian, has an adverse financial interest in the estate of her ward. Dr. Arent inherited a farm which was encumbered by a mortgage of $13,000 when he received it. During a greater portion of the time since he received this property Mrs. Arent has managed it. From this source the two children were given an education. The son completed a course in a school of medicine and the daughter obtained a collegiate degree, majoring in chemistry. It is further shown that Bertha Arent, the wife, inherited money from her family, that she obtained an assignment of the mortgage on the farm through the payment to the then mortgagee of $9869.60. At the time the assignment of the mortgage was made to her there was a balance due on it of $11,000. It is shown by the evidence that the mortgage indebtedness had been reduced by $2000 from the original amount of $13,000 from the income of the farm, that also from this source the children had received their education, that there was at the time of the hearing approximately $2000 in the bank and about $1000 in government bonds, that approximately $1100 and interest on other indebtedness owed by Dr. Arent had been paid and that improvements costing in excess of $700 had been made on the farm property.

The evidence shows that the ward had previously received institutional care and that during this earlier period he had been returned to his home from time to time as circumstances and his condition permitted. It is asserted on the part of the intervener that Bertha Arent is quarrelsome and that she has no present personal interest in the ward and by her actions has indicated that she prefers to have her husband remain in an institution.

I. The proceeding relative to the appointment of a guardian is at law. We have previously held that the findings of the trial court in the selection of a guardian are entitled to great weight. We have further held that if the...