Beasley v. Beasley

• Decision Date: 06 February 1947
• Docket Number: 4 Div. 427.
• Citation: Beasley v. Beasley, 248 Ala. 690, 29 So.2d 232 (Ala. 1947)
• Parties: BEASLEY et al. v. BEASLEY.
• Court: Alabama Supreme Court

29 So.2d 232

248 Ala. 690

BEASLEY et al. v. BEASLEY.

4 Div. 427.

Supreme Court of Alabama

February 6, 1947

Rehearing Denied March 6, 1947.

J L. Murphy, Murphy & Cook and Whaley & Whaley, all of Andalusia, for appellants.

C B. Fuller, of Andalusia, for appellee.

STAKELY Justice.

On August 20, 1942, Robert Beasley and others (appellants) filed their bill of complaint in equity against Susan Beasley (appellee) to set aside two certain deeds executed by C. O Beasley, now deceased, to Susan Beasley on September 6, 1935. The complainants are all the children of C. O. Beasley and are by his first marriage. The respondent is the widow of C O. Beasley and his third wife. It is alleged in the bill that the deeds were procured by fraud or undue influence or that C. O. Beasley at the time of their execution was of unsound mind. The case was heard orally before the court with the result that relief was denied and the bill dismissed. Hence this appeal.

The evidence is voluminous and has been considered with great care. No good purpose can be served by setting it out in detail. Caples v. Young, 206 Ala. 282, 89 So. 460. The following will give a general idea of the case. At the time the deeds were executed C. O. Beasley was over eighty years of age and had been married to Susan Beasley since 1931. He died December 15, 1937. One deed conveyed for a recited consideration of $1 and love and affection the place at the intersection of South Cotton Street and Cawthorn Avenue in Andalusia, Alabama, where C. O. Beasley and Susan Beasley resided and the other deed for the same recited consideration conveyed the property of the grantor immediately adjacent to the home place. These properties constituted all the property of C. O. Beasley and together were worth from $6,000 to $8,000. Susan Beasley was 46 years of age when she married C. O. Beasley. He had no income of any kind except some small uncertain rentals from the adjacent property in the second deed. Susan Beasley at the time of the marriage had saved about $500 which she expended in their home life and in addition thereto she took in sewing, kept a cow and sold milk and butter to help out the family expense. The interests of the children were for the most part centered in their respective homes or lives and none made any contribution to the support of their father except one unmarried daughter. None of the children resided with their father. All the children were of age. There were no children by the second and third marriages.

The mental condition of C. O. Beasley at the time of the execution of the deeds and the alleged fraud or undue influence claimed to have been practiced upon him to procure his execution of the deeds, presented issues of fact. The witnesses testified orally before the court and since we are not willing to say that the findings of the court are palpably wrong, we are unwilling to disturb its decree. Randolph v. Randolph, 245 Ala. 689, 18 So.2d 555; Cornelius v. Walker, Ala.Sup., 27 So.2d 17.

The proof showed that Susan Beasley at the time of the execution of the second deed made a will leaving the property embraced in the second deed--the property adjacent to the home-place--to her husband C. O. Beasley, but in the event her husband predeceased her, the...