Browns v. Brown's Administrators
| Decision Date | 07 June 1844 |
| Parties | Browns <I>vs</I> Brown's Administrators. |
| Court | Kentucky Court of Appeals |
IN 1837, James Brown became the security for the plaintiff in error, on a note to Peter Atherton for $700, borrowed money. In the spring or early in the summer of 1838, the note was paid off and taken in by the security, who shortly afterwards died intestate. His widow and J. G. Thomas administered on his estate, and in September, 1838, the plaintiffs in error executed their note to the administrators for the amount so paid by their intestate in discharge of the note to Atherton. Some time afterwards the widow of James Brown married the defendant, Carpenter, and the note of the plaintiffs in error to the administrators fell into his hands. The plaintiffs having made partial payments thereon, in 1841, took it in and gave their note to Carpenter for the residue, being $715 86. Upon this note Carpenter subsequently brought suit and recovered judgment. The plaintiffs in error then exhibited their bill alledging, in addition to the foregoing facts, that they were the natural sons of James Brown, deceased, and had been always so acknowledged and recognized by him; that being engaged in the mercantile business in a small way, they applied to him, in 1837, for some pecuniary assistance, and not having the money on hand himself, he had aided them in effecting the loan from Atherton for $700, and had united with them in a note for its payment. They alledge that their reputed father possessed a large estate, and had often expressed his intention to aid and assist them, and in furtherance thereof that he paid off the note to Atherton for the $700. That the payment was an advancement and gift to them, and was so designed and expressly avowed by him. That they executed the note to the administrator, and afterwards the one to defendant, Carpenter, without consideration, without counsel or advice, and in entire ignorance of their rights and of the principles of law and equity. They make Carpenter and wife and the administrator, Thomas, defendants, pray for an injunction, that the administrators may be decreed to refund the amount paid them by the complainants on account of the discharge of the note to Atherton, and for general relief.
The defendants answer and deny that the payment of the note to Atherton by the decedent was a gift or so intended by him. And Carpenter insists that whatever equity the complainants may have originally had, it was too late to set it up against him; that the claim had been received by the administratrix, his wife, on account of her interest in her former husband's estate.
The Court below dismissed the complainants bill and they have brought the case before this Court for revision.
Whether the money paid by James Brown, deceased, to Atherton, was or not a valid gift to the complainants is the main question for consideration.
That he always recognized the complainants as his children; manifested for them a good deal of parental regard and attachment; repeatedly expressed much solicitude for their welfare and his intention to give them a start, to assist them in their pecuniary affairs, is very conclusively established by the testimony. So far as appears from any thing in the record, the payment to Atherton was voluntary; there was no coercion nor was the decedent even requested to pay off the note. It is proved that he had a very ample estate, and was regarded in the section of the country where he resided, as a wealthy man. He had a wife, by whom he had several children but he expressed the same regard for the complainants and said they felt as near to him as his legitimate children. He stated that he intended to die without a will, and on that account intended to help the complainants during his life, as they would receive no portion of his estate after his death. Shortly after the payment of the money to Atherton, the deceased spoke of it as a gift to complain...
To continue reading
Request your trial