Aylward v. Briggs

• Decision Date: 17 October 1898
• Citation: 145 Mo. 604,47 S.W. 510
• Parties: AYLWARD et al. v. BRIGGS et al.
• Court: Missouri Supreme Court

47 S.W. 510

145 Mo. 604

AYLWARD et al. v. BRIGGS et al.

Supreme Court of Missouri, Division No. 2.

October 17, 1898.

WILLS — UNDUE INFLUENCE — EVIDENCE.

1. The mere fact that a son to whom his father willed practically all his property had lived with and taken care of his parents in their old age is not evidence of undue influence.

2. A son who lived with and took care of his parents in their old age, and to whom his father willed practically all his property, to the exclusion of daughters, has not the burden of proving absence of undue influence.

3. Contestants of a will which gave practically all testator's property to his son, to the exclusion of his daughters, should not be allowed to ask the beneficiary whether he did not consider it unjust.

Appeal from circuit court, Scotland county; Benjamin E. Turner, Judge.

Proceeding by Edna Aylward and another against William P. Briggs and others. Judgment for plaintiffs. Defendants appeal. Reversed.

Smoot, Mudd & Wagner, for appellants. J. M. Jayne, for respondents.

GANTT, P. J.

This is a proceeding to set aside the last will and testament of James Briggs, deceased, late of Scotland county. An issue of devisavit vel non was framed and submitted to a jury at the February term, 1896, of the Scotland circuit court, and a verdict rendered declaring the writing propounded was not the last will and testament of said James Briggs. The facts, so far as they are deemed necessary to be stated, are that James Briggs, in his early life, was apprenticed to a carpenter to learn his trade, and served until he was 21 years old. He worked at his trade, but also developed a strong desire for a liberal education, and, soon after he came West, he was teaching school, and continued to be a great reader until his death, at the age of 80 years. He came to Scotland county in 1848, and resided there until his death, with the exception of three years spent in seeking gold in California, from 1850 to 1853. He was married, and three children were born to him, one son and two daughters. His wife died two years prior to his own demise. He owned a farm of 550 acres in Scotland county, estimated to be worth $16,000, subject to a mortgage of $800 and a general indebtedness of about $1,200 more. In 1886 he executed the will in contest. He devised 200 acres of his land to his wife for her life, and gave her all his household goods. He gave all the remainder of his property, real and personal, to his son, William P. Briggs, and charged him with the payment of $20 to each of his three grandchildren, Edna, Mary F., and Emma Aylward, when they respectively reached their majority, and $50 to his daughter Mrs. Harriett A. Critz. After the death of her father, Mrs. Critz settled with her brother, William P. Briggs, and accepted $500 in full of her claims to a share in the estate. The plaintiffs in this case are the children of the deceased daughter, Mrs. Aylward, and the defendants, the son, William P., and the other daughter, Mrs. Critz. James Briggs died in 1892, some six years after the execution of his will. The will was attested by John W. Barnes, the cashier of the Scotland County National Bank of Memphis, and W. A. Cox, a merchant of Memphis. It was admitted to probate in December, 1892. This action was commenced in August, 1895. The petition alleges that the testator was of unsound mind and incapable of executing a will, and that the will was procured by the undue influence of William P. Briggs, the principal devisee. It appears from the evidence that the testator was violently opposed to the marriage of each of his daughters, and after their marriage refused to be reconciled to them. It seems that, though they lived in the same neighborhood, he never visited either of them in their own homes; and when they came to his house to visit their mother, who was greatly afflicted with a cancer in her old age, he would leave home, or go into another part of the house, and refuse to see them. His son, William P. Briggs, left home about 1877, to seek his fortune in California. In 1879 the testator wrote him, and urged him to come home and take care of his father and mother, pay the debts, and he should have the farm. William P., in response to this letter, came home, took charge of the farm, which was in a dilapidated condition, remodeled the house, built a new barn, and cribs and other farm houses, rebuilt the fences, cleared the land, and put the worn-out land in clover. He married, and he and his wife cared for the two old people until they died, — the mother in 1890, and his father in 1892. The testimony without contradiction establishes that they were attentive and affectionate, and did all that was possible to render the old people comfortable. The testator's wife was an invalid, and the son took her to two different sanitariums for treatment, and paid all the expenses, amounting to several hundred dollars. The evidence also established that James Briggs was a very poor farmer. His taste led him in a different direction. He was a man of strong political views, and was a local leader in his party. When his son returned, he turned over the farm to him to manage. When it was necessary to obtain money to carry out their plans, he would execute the necessary papers, but he left the practical management entirely to his son. The will was drawn by an attorney in Memphis. The son was not present at the time. After it was signed and attested, it was left with the cashier of the bank in Memphis, to be delivered to his executors after his death. The formal proofs of the execution, attestation, and the soundness of the testator's mind were made by the two subscribing witnesses, and were clear and satisfactory.

On the part of the plaintiffs the evidence tended to prove the unnatural feeling of the testator towards his daughters and their children, in refusing to visit them or speak to them when visiting at his house. The testimony of his daughter was that, as far back as she could remember, he was afflicted with a constant pain in his head, of which he complained, and of an unnatural discharge from his nose, and that on one occasion he acted so strangely the family were alarmed, and sent for a neighbor, one Ingersall, to come and stay with them. His conduct was peculiar and the family could not understand it. Ingersall testified, also, that he went...