Broughton v. Brand

• Decision Date: 20 February 1888
• Parties: BROUGHTON et al. v. BRAND.
• Court: Missouri Supreme Court

7 S.W. 119

94 Mo. 169

BROUGHTON et al. v. BRAND.

Supreme Court of Missouri.

February 20, 1888.

HUSBAND AND WIFE — PERSONAL PROPERTY — REV. ST. MO. § 3296.

Under Rev. St. Mo. 1879, § 3296, which provides that the personal property of the wife shall remain her separate property unless full authority in writing, signed by the wife, is granted to the husband to dispose of the same for his own use, a husband who has invested money received by the wife as a gift from her father, and taken the title to the property so purchased in his own name, with her knowledge and consent, but without having obtained her written consent, does not hold the legal title, but is only a trustee of the property for the benefit of the wife.

Appeal from circuit court, Audrain county; ELIJAH ROBINSON, Judge.

This is a suit in equity by B. B. Broughton, Ann W. Broughton, his wife, and Mary C. Blackford, their daughter, plaintiffs and respondents, against L. C. Brand, defendant and appellant, to have the said defendant declared a trustee of certain real property given by plaintiffs B. B. Broughton and wife to their daughter Lulu M. Broughton, who at the time of the gift was the wife of defendant. The court decreed for plaintiffs, and defendant appealed.

A. Waller, for appellant. Ben. T. Hardin, for respondents.

BRACE, J.

This is a suit in equity, whereby the plaintiffs seek to have the defendant, in whom is vested the legal title to a lot in the city of Moberly, declared a trustee of such title for the benefit of the plaintiffs, and to divest him thereof, and have the same vested in plaintiffs. In May, 1883, the defendant, L. C. Brand, married Lulu M. Broughton, daughter of the plaintiffs B. B. Broughton and his wife, Ann W. Broughton, and sister of plaintiff Mary C. Blackford. In the month of October following, the said Lulu died without children, leaving plaintiffs her only heirs at law. In August, 1883, her father, the plaintiff B. B. Broughton, who lived with his family in Paris Missouri, drew a check on the bank at that place for $1,000, payable to L. C. Brand or bearer, and gave it to his wife, directing her to write to their daughter Lulu, who, with her husband, lived in Moberly, and send her the check; which she accordingly did. Lulu received the check, handed it to her husband, who deposited it in the bank to his own credit, and soon afterwards invested $875 of the money in the property in controversy, and took the deed therefor in his own name. On the trial, the plaintiffs introduced evidence tending to prove that the $1,000 check was a gift from the father to his daughter Lulu; and the defendant, that it was a gift to him. This issue of fact the trial court found for the plaintiffs, and rendered a decree in their favor as prayed for.

As is our duty in equity cases, we have carefully reviewed the evidence in the case; and while it is the invariable practice of this court, in such cases, to defer somewhat to the finding of fact to the chancellor, where there is a conflict of evidence, yet in this case we find it unnecessary to invoke this rule, for, excluding from our consideration that part of the plaintiff B. B. Broughton's testimony in which he says, "I intended this money for my daughter, and gave it to...