Bruer v. Bruer

• Decision Date: 10 December 1909
• Docket Number: 16,319 - (90)
• Citation: 123 N.W. 813,109 Minn. 260
• Parties: CAROLINE BRUER v. LOUIS BRUER and Another
• Court: Minnesota Supreme Court

123 N.W. 813

109 Minn. 260

CAROLINE BRUER v. LOUIS BRUER and Another

Nos. 16,319 - (90)

Supreme Court of Minnesota

December 10, 1909

Action in the district court for Nicollet county against Louis Bruer and his wife Bertha to cancel a certain warranty deed from plaintiff and her husband to defendant Louis Bruer, to declare plaintiff the owner of the premises, and for such other relief as should seem proper to the court. The complaint alleged that the premises conveyed were the homestead of plaintiff and her husband; that the agreement set forth in the opinion was the sole consideration for the execution of the deed; that defendant had forcibly ejected plaintiff from the dwelling house on said premises; that she could not live with him, and that since September 15, 1908 defendant had wholly failed to comply with any of the terms of his agreement. Defendants demurred on the ground that the complaint did not state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action. From an order overruling their demurrer Olsen, J., defendants appealed. Affirmed.

SYLLABUS

Cancellation of Deed -- Breach of Agreement to Support Parent.

A parent, who conveys real property to his son in consideration of the son's agreement to support and maintain the parent during the remainder of his life, whether the agreement of support constitutes a condition subsequent or not, may for a breach of the agreement, in a proper action, have the deed or conveyance canceled or set aside, or the amount due under the agreement made a charge or lien against the land, or such other relief as the equities between the parties, as shown by the evidence, may justify.

Complaint Good against Demurrer.

Complaint held to state a cause of action for the relief proper to be granted in such an action.

Davis & Olsen, for appellants.

Somerville & Hauser, for respondent.

OPINION

BROWN, J.

It appears from the complaint in this action that on the seventeenth day of February, 1893, plaintiff's husband was the owner of certain land in Nicollet county, of the value of $4,500, which then, and for many years prior, had constituted the family homestead; that on the date stated plaintiff and her husband, being then well advanced in years, and desirous of making such disposition of the property as would secure to them sufficient support and maintenance in health and sickness during the remainder of their lives, and whereby they might be relieved of the care and responsibility in connection with the operation of the farm, entered into an agreement with Louis Bruer, their son, whereby they by warranty deed conveyed the property to said son in consideration of a contemporaneous execution by him of an agreement for their support for the remainder of their lives. This agreement was in the following form and language, viz.:

"Know all men by these presents, that I, Louis Bruer, of the town of Courtland, in the county of Nicollet and state of Minnesota, am held and firmly bound unto Caroline and Henry Bruer, her husband, of the same place, in the sum of two thousand dollars, lawful money of the United States, to be paid to the said Caroline Bruer and Henry Bruer, her husband, or the survivor thereof, their heirs, executors, administrators or assigns, for which payment, well and truly to be made, I bind myself, my heirs, executors and administrators, jointly and severally, firmly by these presents.

"Sealed with my seal, and dated this seventeenth day of February, A.D. 1893.

"The condition of the above obligation is such that, whereas, the said Caroline Bruer and Henry Bruer, her husband, have this day granted, bargained, sold, and conveyed to said Louis Bruer certain valuable pieces of real property, situate in said Nicollet county; and whereas, the said Louis Bruer in consideration of said conveyance covenanted and agreed to and with said Caroline Bruer and Henry Bruer, her husband, to keep and maintain them, the said Caroline Bruer and Henry Bruer, during their natural lives, and the survivor thereof during his or her natural life, in suitable lodging, board and clothing and necessary firewood, dried, cut and split, in suitable size for the stove, all his own expense [sic] and free from any charges to said Caroline or Henry Bruer, this at his own residence in said county of Nicollet, if possible, and that, in case they could not agree to live peaceably together in the same house, then in that case, at the request of said Caroline Bruer, he, the said Louis Bruer, should and would build a suitable dwelling for them to live in, on his premises, and furnish them with suitable food, clothing and firewood, as above mentioned; and whereas, the said Louis Bruer further covenanted and agreed, consideration of said conveyance, to pay annually and each and every year during her natural life to said Caroline Bruer the sum of fifty dollars in lawful money of the United States, the first payment thereof to be made on the first day of December, A.D. 1893, and annually thereafter on or before each succeeding first day of December, and it being further covenanted and agreed, between the parties above named, that in the case of the death of said Louis Bruer before the death of said Caroline Bruer, that she, the said Caroline Bruer, shall be entitled to claim and receive from the estate of said Louis Bruer the sum of one thousand dollars in lieu of and in payment in full of the annuities hereinbefore mentioned to be delivered to her and her husband in full satisfaction of this bond:

"Now, therefore, if the above bounden Louis Bruer shall well and truly perform all the obligations and make all the payments at such time and times as he hereinbefore to perform the same [sic] and make payment thereof, then this obligation to be null and void; otherwise, to remain in full force and virtue.

"Witness my hand and seal, and dated, this seventeenth day of February, 1893."

This contract and agreement on the part of the son constituted the sole and only consideration for the conveyance of the property to him. Defendant Bertha Bruer is the wife of defendant Louis Bruer. Soon after the execution of these instruments, plaintiff's husband died. The complaint alleges that defendant has failed and refused to comply with his agreement in many substantial respects, which are particularly enumerated therein. The prayer for relief is that the deed, together with the record thereof, be canceled and declared null and void, and that plaintiff have such other or further relief as the court may deem proper and just. Defendants joined in a general demurrer to the complaint, and appealed from an order overruling it.

As we understand the facts as pleaded, the conveyance to defendant was in the ordinary form of a warranty deed, containing no exceptions or reservations respecting the estate conveyed and it passed to defendant the unconditional title to the property. The agreement of support, a separate contract, though a part of the same transaction, and the sole consideration of the deed, in no way limits the operation and effect of the deed, nor does it, expressly or otherwise, declare that a failure to comply with its provisions shall work a forfeiture of the title or other rights acquired by the conveyance. In view of this situation, it is the contention of defendants that, conceding the breach of the contract, plainti...