Beverley v. Walden

• Decision Date: 06 December 1870
• Citation: 61 Va. 147
• Parties: BEVERLEY v. WALDEN.
• Court: Virginia Supreme Court

61 Va. 147

BEVERLEY v. WALDEN.

Supreme Court of Appeals of Virginia.

December 6, 1870

Joynes, J. Absent, sick.

1. Whether a court of equity will direct an issue to be tried by a jury is a question of discretion; but it is a sound judicial discretion, and if improperly exercised, an appellate court will correct it.

2. When the allegations of the bill are positively denied by the answer, and the plaintiff has failed to produce two witnesses, or one witness and strong corroborating circumstances, in support of the bill, it is error in the chancellor to order an issue. No issue should be ordered until the plaintiff has thrown the burden of proof on the defendant.

3. Plaintiff seeks to set aside his deed and contract, on the ground that he was, at the time, of unsound mind and incapable of making the contract. Quæ re: If the denial, in the answer, of the unsoundness of mind and incapacity, is the denial of a fact which puts the plaintiff upon the proof of it by two witnesses, or one witness and strong corroborating circumstances, or merely puts him upon proof of the fact by such evidence as may be satisfactory to the court?

4. In such case the testimony of witnesses present at the factum, and the written acts of the party attesting his capacity, is more to be relied on than the opinions of other witnesses, based upon facts which may be true, and yet not be the result of unsoundness of mind.

By a contract in writing, dated the 4th day of June, 1863, John Walden sold to Robert Beverley, his farm in the county of Fauquier, on which he lived, containing about eight hundred and seventy acres, for forty dollars per acre, payable in Confederate money; of which $20,000 was to be paid on or before the 1st day of August, 1863, and the balance by the 1st of January, 1864; to which time Walden was to retain possession of the farm, and a deed was to be made on or before the 1st of August, 1863.

Beverley appears to have anticipated the payment of the purchase money at the request of Walden; and Walden, by a deed dated the 8th day of July, 1863, and wholly written by himself, conveyed the land to Beverley. The deed was prepared to be executed by Mrs. Walden, but she declined to do it.

On the 1st of January, 1864, Beverley and Walden executed another paper, by which Beverley rented to Walden the mansion house yard, garden, & c., for the year 1864; for which Walden was to pay him $100, keep farm, fences, buildings, & c in as good order as possible, and also to attend to the renting of other parts of the farm for Beverley. And on the 1st of January, 1865, this contract was renewed for that year.

In 1866, Beverley instituted a proceeding of unlawful detainer against Walden, to recover possession of the land, and recovered a judgment in that case. And then Walden filed his bill in the Circuit court of Fauquier against Beverley, to restrain Beverley from taking possession of the land, and to set aside the contract of June 4th, 1863, and the deed of July 8th of the same year. The grounds of relief set up in the bill were, first, that the contract and conveyance had been procured by fraud; second, that it was a contract for Confederate money, which, it was insisted, was illegal and void; and, third, that the plaintiff, at the time of said contract and conveyance, was not of sound mind, capable of making a contract.

Beverley demurred to the bill and filed his answer, in which he denied the fraud, and denied that Walden was of unsound mind, incapable of contracting at the time said contract and deed was executed.

An immense mass of testimony was taken, and the cause coming on to be heard on the 9th day of April, 1868, the court overruled the demurrer, and made a decree directing that an issue be made up and tried on the common law side of the court, before a jury, to ascertain whether or not John Walden, at the time of the execution of the contract and deed aforesaid, was of sound mind and understanding, capable of executing said contract and deed. And from this decree Beverley obtained an appeal to the District court of Fredericksburg, where the decree was affirmed; and he thereupon obtained an appeal to this court.

The material statements of the bill and answer are set out in the opinion of Christian, J. It is impossible to give a statement of the evidence. The view taken of it by this court will be seen in the opinion.

Forbes and Tucker for the appellant.

Brooke and Green for the appellee.

CHRISTIAN J.

John Walden filed his bill in the Circuit court of Fauquier county, in which he alleged that Robert Beverley had instituted against him an action of unlawful entry and detainer, to recover from him the possession of a certain tract of land, lying in said county, containing 870 acres, on which the said John Walden then resided. He further charged, that in the month of May, 1863, he was approached by Beverley with offers to purchase his farm. That, prior to these negotiations for the purchase of his farm, Beverley had sought and effected various purchases of horses, cattle, & c., and had discovered that he was in a frame of mind which incapacitated him from protecting his just rights in contracts with bold and unscrupulous men; that, emboldened by his success in this minor traffic, Beverley conceived the plan of bargaining the said Walden out of his valuable homestead." That, accordingly, Beverley made offers for said land, which resulted in a contract of sale, dated June 4th, 1863, which was afterwards consummated in due form by deed bearing date July 8th, 1863.

He further charged, that " at the time he sold his farm to Beverley, and for months before and afterwards, his health was extremely delicate; that he was affected with a chronic inflammation of the bladder, which oftentimes brought him in mortal agony to the verge of the grave; that he was never free from bodily pain, although there were intervals when the paroxysms subsided, in which he could engage in an active watchfulness over his property. That at that period, the whole country was under constant excitement and alarm; that the marches of hostile armies, the visitation of ruffian marauders, and the general insecurity of life and property, filled every man with trouble and anxiety." That, in addition to all these sources of irritation and depression, " he was borne down with difficulties and troubles of a domestic nature" (the character of which he declines to state), which he says were enough to have unsettled his judgment.

He further states, that he looks back upon the facts he narrates, " with astonishment at the part he enacted, and that he is satisfied that, possessed of his proper reason, he never would have played such a role." Then proceeding, says " he believes, and therefore charges, that, at the time of entering upon the sale of his land, of executing the said contract and deed, he was not of a sound contracting mind and judgment; " and that the disease under which he was laboring, with other causes of anxiety and trouble, had so far unsettled his reason, as to make him an easy prey to the unscrupulous avarice of Beverley.

After referring to certain sales of personal property to Beverley at different times, at low prices, which he says he would not have made if he had possessed his natural shrewdness, Walden further charges in his bill, " that it was after this experience of his incapacity to protect himself in matters of contract, and with a perfect knowledge of his debility, both of body and mind, that Beverley opened negotiations for the purchase of his homestead. That, by earnest and persistent solicitations, he succeeded in procuring the contract for sale, and finally the formal execution of the deed, whereby, for the grossly inadequate price of $40 per acre in Confederate currency, under the forms of law, he deprived himself and family of their home."

The bill further alleges, that the whole of the purchase money, to wit: the sum of thirty-four thousand seven hundred and ninety dollars, was fully paid in August, 1863; that, by the terms of the original contract, Walden occupied the land till the 1st of January, 1864, paying, as rent for the same, a certain part of the hay raised on said farm. That, on the 1st January, 1864, the parties entered into a written contract, under seal, by which Walden rented the farm for the year 1864, and, by a written memorandum at the foot of this agreement, the same contract of rent was continued for the year 1865.

The bill further alleges, that about the time of the contract of rent, to wit: on the first day of January, 1864, he (Walden) " began to realize the ruin which, by his own acts, he had brought upon himself; that he found himself a renter of his own farm, and managing it as agent for another; that, though not yet restored to his proper health of mind and body, he now, nevertheless, begun to assert a claim to his farm, determining that, when the proper time came, he would contest Beverley's right, under all his contracts and deed. That, in July, 1865, the country having become settled, and there being a fair prospect that courts of justice would again assume their sway, he deemed it a fit time to disclose to Beverley the position he designed to take in regard to the land; " which he accordingly did early in July, 1865.

Upon these facts, and others not necessary to refer to, stated in his bill with great elaboration and minuteness, he prays that Beverley may be enjoined and restrained from further proceedings at law to enforce the judgment which Beverley had obtained in an action of unlawful entry and detainer, until the question of title could be fully adjudicated between them; that the contract and deed might be declared null and void; and that he might be restored to his rights, in like...