Boyles v. Burnett
| Decision Date | 05 March 1923 |
| Parties | BERTINA BOYLES, Respondent, v. S. D. BURNETT, Appellant |
| Court | Kansas Court of Appeals |
Appeal from the Circuit Court of Jackson County.--Hon. Willard P Hall, Judge.
AFFIRMED.
Judgment affirmed.
Prince Harris & Beery for respondent.
L. T Dryden, Burrus & Burrus and A. N. Gossett for appellant.
--This is a suit in damages. It appears from the record that one Martin D. Boyles, who died September 18, 1890, owned 100 acres of land in Andrew County, Missouri, which by will he devised to his wife Evelyn J., during her life, with remainder to be divided equally among their five children. Evelyn J. Boyles died in July, 1915. On account of a judgment having been rendered against George M. Boyles, one of said children, his interest in the land was sold in November, 1893, and passed to the other four children, one of whom was Bloomer C. Boyles, husband of plaintiff. Bloomer C. Boyles and plaintiff had been divorced but had resumed marital relations under common-law marriage in June, 1908. Bloomer C. Boyles died in March, 1912, leaving no children.
Prior to the death of Bloomer C. Boyles, a judgment for $ 7.92 was rendered against him, and to satisfy said judgment, his interest in said land was sold and a sheriff's deed therefor executed to the purchaser, James A. Harlin, in May, 1908. On May 12, 1909, plaintiff purchased Harlin's interest in said land for the sum of $ 250, receiving from him a quit-claim deed which she kept in her house for a period of about two years without having it recorded. In December, 1911, she placed said deed in the hands of her husband for the purpose of having it recorded at Savannah, the county seat of Andrew County. Her husband did not have the deed recorded but instead carried it with him to Kansas City, Mo., where he remained for a short time prior to going to Colorado where, as stated, he died in March, 1912.
Defendant herein was a brother-in-law of Bloomer C. Boyles, having married the latter's sister who was one of the heirs of Evelyn J. Boyles. The probate court of Jackson County, Mo., appointed defendant administrator of the estate of Bloomer C. Boyles. Thereafter, a proceeding was instituted in said court by plaintiff setting out that, as the widow of Bloomer C. Boyles, deceased, she was entitled to administer his estate and praying the removal of defendant as such administrator. Thereafter, and on October 13, 1913, an order was made in said court adjudging plaintiff to be the widow of Bloomer C. Boyles and, as such, entitled to administer his estate.
During this proceeding, defendant produced a quit-claim deed wherein the grantor was James A. Harlin and the grantee Bloomer C. Boyles. It is claimed by plaintiff, and the testimony in her behalf tends to show, that this was the deed in which Harlin had conveyed to her his interest in the land in question, but that the name Bertina had been erased therein and that of Bloomer substituted therefor. A few months prior to his removal as administrator of the estate of Bloomer C. Boyles, defendant filed an inventory in said court in which he listed the undivided one-fourth interest in the land in question as the property of Bloomer C. Boyles.
On October 19, 1915, after his removal as administrator, defendant placed of record a deed dated October 18, 1918, purporting to convey the interest of said Harlin in said land to the four brothers and sisters of Bloomer C. Boyles, one of whom was the wife of defendant. Plaintiff charges this deed was fictitious.
Defendant, in his answer, admits that Harlan conveyed his interest in the land to plaintiff on May 12, 1909, but no attempt was made by defendant to purchase her interest therein. On November 8, 1915, a partition suit was filed in the circuit court of Andrew County, by one of the brothers of Bloomer C. Boyles, and the other brother and the two surviving sisters were made defendants therein. The petition in that suit alleged that Bloomer C. Boyles died intestate leaving surviving him no children and no wife. Plaintiff herein was not made a party to said suit, and so far as the record discloses, had no notice of the same. The cause was disposed of without contest. The decree of the circuit court declared that Bloomer C. Boyles had died intestate, leaving no children and no wife; that on May 29, 1908, the interest of Bloomer C. Boyles was sold by sheriff's sale and conveyed to James Harlin who by mesne conveyance has conveyed to Cora E. Burnett and Spotswood D. Burnett, William L. Boyles and Anna P. Van Horn. The decree further allotted to defendant herein the sum of $ 372.65, expenses alleged to have been incurred by him in protecting the interests of his co-defendants. The decree also ordered the sale of said land at public vendue. In accordance with said order the said lands were sold on February 24, 1916, to one James T. Simpson for the sum of $ 9720.
On November 10, 1917, plaintiff herein instituted ejectment proceedings against said Simpson for the recovery of a one-fourth interest in said land. The trial resulted in a hung jury and thereafter a compromise was entered into between plaintiff herein and Simpson, whereby the latter paid the former $ 2250 for her interest in the lands, and an instrument termed "Covenant not to Sue" was executed, the purport of which was that Bertina Boyles agreed not to sue Simpson, but reserved therein the right to prosecute such claims as she might have against other persons than James T. Simpson, and especially against S.D. Burnett. After the execution of said instrument and the payment to plaintiff of the $ 2250, the suit against Simpson was dismissed, and the case at bar was instituted against Burnett, wherein plaintiff seeks reimbursement for expenses incurred by her in her effort to recover possession of her land, amounting to $ 1213.80, and in addition, damages in the sum of $ 2250, said amount representing the alleged value of her land over and above the amount received by her from Simpson. She also asked punitive damages, alleging fraud and malicious acts of defendant.
The answer admits the execution of the deed from Harlin to plaintiff, as alleged in the petition, and enters a special denial as to all other allegations. Further answering defendant charges that plaintiff held said deed from Harlin in trust for Bloomer C. Boyles, and that she wrongfully and fraudulently suppressed and concealed it and charges her with laches in withholding said deed from record, and with vexatious and annoying litigation against defendant.
The reply was a general denial. The cause was tried to a jury and judgment was rendered for plaintiff in the sum of $ 1202.55 actual and $ 4,000 punitive damages. Motions for new trial and in arrest duly filed were overruled by the court and defendant appeals.
The first assignment of error charges the trial court erred in admitting, over the objections of defendant, a transcript of the proceedings in the probate court of Jackson County attending the removal of defendant as administrator of the estate of Bloomer C. Boyles, declaring such evidence improper because not tending to sustain any of the issues in the case, that it was highly prejudicial to defendant, and tended to distort and cloud the issues in the case.
In considering this point, we must bear in mind that the petition charges fraud. In the admission of evidence to establish fraud, the courts always have allowed the broadest latitude. [Sawyer v. Walker, 204 Mo. 133, 102 S.W. 544, 551; Massey v. Young, 73 Mo. 260.] In the latter case the court, speaking through SHERWOOD, C. J., at p. 273, said:
...
To continue reading
Request your trial