Coldwell v. Coldwell

• Citation: 228 S.W. 95
• Decision Date: 30 December 1920
• Docket Number: No. 21573.,21573.
• Parties: COLDWELL et al., v. COLDWELL et al.
• Court: United States State Supreme Court of Missouri

228 S.W. 95

COLDWELL et al., v. COLDWELL et al.

No. 21573.

Supreme Court of Missouri, Division No. 1.

December 30, 1920.

Rehearing Denied March 5, 1921.

Appeal from Circuit Court, Audrain County; Ernest S. Gantt, Judge.

Suit by J. William Coldwell and others against Rebecca J. Coldwell and others to contest the will of Rufus L. Coldwell. Judgment for plaintiffs, rejecting the will, and defendants appeal. Affirmed.

This suit was instituted in the circuit court of Audrain county, by the plaintiff against the defendants to contest the will of Rufus L. Coldwell. A trial was had before the court and jury, which resulted in a verdict and judgment in favor of the plaintiff, rejecting the will, and in proper form the defendants appealed the cause to this court.

On account of the principal contention of counsel for appellants, that there is no material or substantial evidence contained in this record tending to show that undue influence was exercised over the mind of the testator, it will be necessary to set out much of it that is disclosed by the record.

The record is unnecessarily lengthy, but counsel have substantially complied with Rule No. 15 (198 S. W. vi) of this court in making statements of the case, and as the correctness of the statement of neither is directly challenged, I shall quote substantially the statement of each, as the statement of the case here, avoiding unnecessary repetition.

The will was duly proven and probated in the probate court of Audrain county, and this suit was brought to contest the same. For the present, it is sufficient to state that the evidence for the proponents of the will makes a prima facie case for the jury.

The evidence for the plaintiffs tended to show that:

Rufus L. Coldwell died in Audrain county, Mo., about the 6th, day of February, 1917, and left what purports to be a last will, dated the 26th day of September, 1914.

The said Rufus L. Coldwell left surviving him seven children, to wit, Rebecca J., Buddie, C. L. (Collis) Coldwell, Emily Byrns, Lizzie Morris, Alice Byars, and J. William Coldwell, one of the plaintiffs herein, and one grandson, a plaintiff, Robert L. Crum.

The said Collis Coldwell died in January, 1918, after the death of said Rufus. The other defendants are his children.

The plaintiffs in this case are J. W. Coldwell, a son, who was willed $5, and Robert Crum, a grandson, the only child of testator's daughter Mary, who was willed $500. The testimony shows that the grandson was on especially friendly terms with the deceased, seemed to think a great deal of him, and his mother was one of the deceased's favorite daughters, and young Crum stayed at his grandfather's house quite a long time, and the relations between himself and his grandfather were always friendly.

The deceased was a farmer; came to Audrain county in an early day (1854) and was exceptionally prosperous. His wife died April 26, 1914. On the date of his death the testator was either 86 or 87 years of age.

The plaintiffs alleged mental incapacity and undue influence by the defendants, especially the defendant Yemen Byrns, and it is also alleged that the defendants prejudiced Rufus L. Coldwell against the plaintiffs by misrepresenting the facts to him as to the amount of money and property he had advanced and given to his children, and caused the said Rufus L. Coldwell to erroneously believe that he had advanced and given to the plaintiffs much more in money and property that he had advanced and given to any of his other children, and caused him to erroneously believe that he had advanced to his son William more money and property than he had advanced to any of his other children.

The evidence on the part of the plaintiffs tended to show that the said Rufus L. Coldwell, in the year 1914, entertained a delusion that his son J. William Coldwell had not paid him any rent for a farm that he had been occupying for a great many years. This delusion was planted in the testator's mind by the beneficiaries and is written into the will, and appears therein expressed in the following language:

"My son, J. William Coldwell, has had the use of seventy-five acres of land, more or less, for twenty-five years, without paying any rent, and I have given him nine hundred and eight dollars a short time ago which I feel makes him equal to what the other children will receive."

The proof that the testator's son William had not occupied any of plaintiff's land rent free was overwhelming in the case, and the recital that he had given him $908 was proven to be incorrect; the testimony showing that he had given him $980.

The testimony relevant to the delusion that Will Coldwell had had the use of one of testator's farms free is in substance as follows:

Will Coldwell lived with his father on the latter's farm until he was 23 years old. The father owned another farm near Benton City, and Will moved onto that farm in 1887. The first two years he paid money rent. After the first two years other arrangements were made and he paid crop rent and occupied the place until he bought it in 1915. 2.:n the early days, the father pastured his own mules and horses on the place. When the son Will first took possession of the place, it was prairie grass and prairie weeds. It contained 150 acres and there were about 100 acres in cultivation; the remainder of the land was prairie, partly broken.

About eight years after Will took possession of the place, he put 16 acres in timothy, furnishing the seed himself. He settled with his father every year, giving him one-third of what was raised, crop rent. The father would sometimes leave the rent corn on the place two or three years, waiting for a better price. He gave him one-third of all the corn, and one-third of all the oats, giving him, in later years, one-half the oats. The son Will put improvements on the place at his own expense, costing between $2,000 and $3,000, and kept the place in repair at his own expense, doing the work and furnishing the material. When he bought the place in 1915, his father allowed him $2,500 for the improvements. There never was any dispute about the payment of the rent until the delusion developed shortly before the will in question was made.

The son Will also paid the taxes during the entire time that he occupied the place,

The rent was paid up until 1914, the money for the year 1914 being put in the First National Bank, and referred to as Mr. Buckner's Bank, and some unsold corn remained on the place as rent corn at the time of the father's death.

The above facts were not only proved by the testimony of J. Will Coldwell, but by the testimony of James W. Dowell, and nearly all the witnesses who testified on behalf of the defendant. A careful reading of the record will satisfy any unbiased and fair mind that the claim that the plaintiff, Will Coldwell, had used his father's farm, rent free, was utterly baseless, a delusion not founded on any fact, but apparently so firmly lodged in the father's mind about the time he made his will that he could not be reasoned out of it.

Dr. William H. Douglass, the family physician of Rufus Coldwell, testified in the case. He was the family physician for him for about 16 years, and had known him for 25 years. He testified that in the years 1914 and 1915 he was progressively more feeble, and his condition at that time was such that lie could not get around without some one accompanying him. He had to walk with a cane and was partially blind. He could scarcely recognize old acquaintances at any great distance; only one eye had any vision at all. He said that about the 26th day of September, 1914, when the will was executed, his condition was childish, bordering on senility or senile dementia, and his memory was faulty. He could remember things occurring quite a number of years back, but was mentally weak as to recent occurrences. He would give different answers to the same question after short intervals. The conditions became more exaggerated the older he got. In a general way, the medical term, the doctor said, which would describe his condition, was "senile dementia"; that is, a gradual failing of the mental faculties due to senility or to age — simple decay. You might call it softening of the brain.

In answer to the question whether or not he was, on September 26, 1914, capable of transacting the usual and ordinary affairs of life in a business way, he said anything that would require any exercise of any acute memory or judgment, anything like that, he would have to answer no; "do not believe that he was in a condition to attend to any business of any great extent. Anything requiring the exercise of judgment or requiring any recapitulation of memory, he was not capable of doing. He had the palsy, or tremor ; he also had neuralgia, which involves the nerves, in that it is in the nerves of the trunk and chest."

Quite a number of witnesses gave testimony to the same effect; that the alleged testator was old, childish, mentally weak, forgetful, and, in 1914, very markedly in his dotage. H. B. Rice, a minister of the Baptist Church, was offered as a witness by plaintiffs, and on cross-examination he, speaking of the deceased, said:

"He was a feeble man. He was what is popularly called in his decline and dotage. In talking, he talked like one in his decline and dotage."

In the will which is under attack, $5 is given to the son William, and $500 to the grandson, Robert L. Crum. The estate of Rufus L. Coldwell which remained intact at the time of his death was worth over $50,000, and from May 16, 1914, to April 17, 1916, he distributed among his children, exclusive of William and his grandson, substantially $50,000.

May 16, 1914, he distributed to his seven children $980 apiece. In June, 1914, he distributed $1,150 each to all of his children with the exception of William and Collis. July 22, 1914, he distributed to all his children, except plaintiff William, $235 each. His gifts to the other...