Bell v. Waudby

• Decision Date: 17 September 1892
• Citation: 31 P. 18,4 Wash. 743
• Parties: BELL v. WAUDBY ET AL. [1]
• Court: Washington Supreme Court

31 P. 18

4 Wash. 743

BELL v. WAUDBY ET AL. ^[1]

Supreme Court of Washington

September 17, 1892

Appeal from superior court. Whitman county; R. F. STURDEVANT, Judge.

Action by John Bell against Belle Waudby, executrix, and others, to have a claim secured by chattel mortgage established against the estate of William Waudby, deceased, and for a personal judgment against said Belle Waudby, widow and sole legatee of said deceased, and to have said judgment declared a lien on the property described in said mortgage. From a decree for defendants, plaintiff appeals. Reversed.

Scott J., dissenting.

F M. Ellsworth, Norman Buck, and Matt. Kelly, for appellant.

F H. Brown and Chadwick & Fullerton, for respondent Belle Waudby.

HOYT J.

The material question presented by the record in this cause is as to whether or not the notes set out in the complaint, and the chattel mortgage to secure the same, were in the lifetime of William F. Waudby, legally executed by him. A large mass of testimony was introduced by the respective parties, bearing more or less directly upon this issue, and the court below decided against the legality of such execution. We have given such testimony a most careful examination, and are reluctantly forced to the opinion that the finding of such court in that regard was wrong. It is impossible, within the proper limits of this opinion, to attempt to quote the testimony pro and con introduced by the respective parties upon this question, and therefrom deduce our reasons for coming to the conclusion that said notes and mortgage were properly executed by said deceased, and were and are proper claims against his estate. It must suffice for us to say that the proof satisfies us that upon the day when these instruments purported to have been executed, and the day preceding such purported execution, there was such a talking over and adjustment of the indebtedness of the said Waudby to John Bell, to whom said notes and mortgage were made, that we are satisfied that the whole matter of such indebtedness must have been fully and entirely understood both by said William F. Waudby and Belle Waudby, his wife. In view of the full discussion had in relation to such indebtedness on the two days above referred to, and of the further fact, which abundantly appears in the record, that said Belle Waudby was a woman of more than ordinary intelligence, and was as fully informed of all the business transactions of her husband as he was himself, it is not reasonable to suppose that she should have believed that their indebtedness to said Bell was over $1,700, when in fact, as now claimed by her, it was only about $700. That said Belle Waudby was in the full possession of her faculties at the time of such settlement, and most carefully considered the items of indebtedness presented by said Bell, which made up the amount for which said notes and mortgage were given, is abundantly shown by the record. We think, therefore, that as a basis for the investigation of the acts of said William F. Waudby and his wife at the time of the alleged execution of the instruments in question, it must be assumed that the whole of the indebtedness to secure which said papers were executed was due from said Waudby to said Bell. This being so, almost the entire argument of respondent as to the insufficient execution of the papers in question falls to the ground. The indebtedness once being assumed to have existed, and the duty thus placed upon William F. Waudby to pay or secure the same, his execution of the notes for the purpose of so securing it will be upheld upon much less proof, as to his capacity to so execute, than they would if the only proof of consideration for such instruments was the recitals therein, and the execution thereof.

The conclusions which we have above stated leave only two questions of fact in relation to such execution, as to which a word, perhaps, ought to be said. The first is as to the actual state of mind of William F. Waudby at the time of such execution, for, even although the indebtedness as between him and the said Bell existed to the full amount named in said notes and mortgage, yet if he was absolutely incompetent to do any business, or to at all realize what was going on around him, his attempted execution, when in that condition would be ineffectual, and the notes and mortgage, as such, would have no binding force. The testimony bearing upon his condition at this time is somewhat conflicting, but, as we view it, that most favorable to the case of the respondent shows him to have been in such a condition that he knew all that was going on about him, and was fully able to understand ordinary business transactions. It is true such testimony...