Collier v. Collier
| Decision Date | 27 February 1912 |
| Parties | COLLIER v. COLLIER et al. |
| Court | Georgia Supreme Court |
Error from Superior Court, Fulton County; J. T. Pendleton, Judge.
Action by Sanford G. Collier against J. W. Collier and another executors. Judgment for defendants, and plaintiff brings error. Reversed.
In his petition to vacate a deed of relinquishment of his interest under the will of his father, and an acquittance receipt to the executors of the will, the plaintiff, Sanford G. Collier alleged as follows:
He is the youngest child of his father, reared on his father's farm near the city of Atlanta, reaching his majority with practically no education. Upon his arrival at the age of 21 years, he moved to the neighboring city, where he became dissipated and acquired habits and formed social relations that unfitted him for business and rendered him incapable of properly caring for himself in the struggle of life. On March 1, 1906, his father died testate, leaving a will in which the estate was to be equally divided between his wife plaintiff's mother, his nine living children, and the representative of a deceased child; that is to say, into eleven shares, one share to each legatee. The portion of the estate devised to the testator's wife was given to her to use and enjoy during her life, and if at her death any portion of the same should remain unconsumed or unused by her in her support, it was to be equally divided among the children or their legal representatives. The sixth item of the will was as follows: The will was duly probated, and the executors qualified as such at the April term, 1906, of the court of ordinary.
At the time of the death of his father the plaintiff was heavily involved in debt, from which he had no ability to extricate himself, and in his hopelessness there was no prospect for him to do anything towards earning a livelihood or making anything by which to care for his wife and himself. His share of his father's estate was all he could see from which he could possibly secure subsistence. He had no conception of its value. He knew that his father left a body of land (500 acres) besides other property. While he knew where this 500 acres of land was situated, and had lived on it all his life he did not know anything really of its value; and by reason of his course of life for the past six or seven years since reaching his majority he was totally incapable and incapacitated to estimate values. The executors were his elder brothers, both of whom had considerable experience in business, and were fully acquainted with the estate of his father. Upon their qualification as executors they immediately began to sell portions of the estate, and paid to the plaintiff small amounts on his legacy, aggregating from $1,000 to $1,500, which were insufficient to pay his debts, which were burdening him, and to support his wife and himself. The plaintiff was in great stress and wanted money, and he insisted and kept insisting that he must have money; but the executors replied to his importunities that they were not obliged to divide the estate until it suited them, that under the will no division could be demanded until they in their discretion saw proper to make a division, that they were clothed with full power to control and manage it so long as they thought best, and they refused to make a division. Plaintiff supposed that they had the right to keep the estate together, as they contended. They were acquainted with his condition, and knew his habits; and while they were fully aware of the necessities, which he was incapable of supplying, and believing, perhaps, that he would soon waste and squander whatever they might turn over to him, they determined not to make a division of the estate. He frequently appealed to the executors to turn over to him at least a portion of his legacy; but they would not, and declared that they would not divide the estate or sell it, and would not advance him anything until the estate in their judgment warranted a division, and left him in a position where he had nothing with which to support his wife and himself, and no prospects then to get anything with which to subsist.
In this situation he received from the attorney of the executors a letter, which was attached to the petition, at the instance and request of the executors, looking to a full and complete settlement of the plaintiff's interest of every kind and character in the estate of his father. In the letter it was stated that it was not the wish of the executors that the plaintiff should dispose of his interest in the estate, except in the usual and ordinary way, as the estate would be wound up in due course and process of business, under the terms and power of the will; but as it appeared from conversations with his attorney, agent, and himself that the plaintiff had fully determined to dispose of his interest, the executors submitted three propositions, one of which was that the plaintiff be paid $14,000 and lot No. 14 in block B be deeded to him in fee simple, $5,000 of this sum to be paid in cash, and the remainder to be distributed into equal annual payments covering a period of five years, the deferred payments to be evidenced by notes of the estate, payable on or before date of maturity, without interest; that the executors were willing personally to advance the plaintiff's pro rata share of all money on hand, in order to relieve his present necessities, although they did not think it wise under present circumstances to make a full division of all money on hand, as they contemplated expenditures of several thousand dollars in opening up and shaping the property for sale the next spring, and did not think it good policy to divest themselves of money on hand belonging to the estate, but the rest of the heirs would be willing for them to advance the plaintiff his portion and allow theirs to remain for the present in the treasury of the estate; that the executors had already, within the first year of their operations, sold about $31,000 worth of land, receiving remarkably good prices therefor, and it would be unwise for the executors to attempt to dump all of the 500 acres of land on a glutted market at one time, especially as the land was not prepared for sale; that large developments were going on in that neighborhood, and the project to extend the car line was in actual progress. Reference was made to item 6 of the will of Wesley G. Collier, as containing the powers and duties imposed upon the executors. It was stated that, in the event the plaintiff accepted either of the propositions, the whole matter would have to be submitted to all the legatees for their unanimous ratification; that one legatee had already expressed himself as being opposed to any settlement with the plaintiff above $15,000; but that the propositions were submitted with the hope that, if any of them were accepted, all the heirs could be induced to agree.
The plaintiff promptly accepted the proposition set out in the letter from the attorney of the executors, and on the 22d of October, 1907, he went to the office of the attorney of the executors, where the final papers were to be drawn and executed. It required considerable time to prepare the papers, and during their preparation the executors discoursed at length on what a very favorable arrangement the plaintiff was making, and how they really regretted that they had made such a proposition, and one of them manifested a disposition to withdraw it, as he thought what they were paying was more than the plaintiff's interest was worth, and they ought not to consummate it. By the terms of the settlement the plaintiff received $5,000 in cash, notes aggregating the sum of $9,000, and a deed to the lot valued at $3,000, which the executors assured him was more than his legacy under the will would be worth; and, believing and trusting in them, he signed the deed to them as executors, conveying all his right, title, and interest, present and future, in the estate of his father, and also gave to them a receipt reciting that the money, notes, and deed which he received were in full settlement of all his interest, title, and claim in the estate of his father. He negotiated the notes, sold the lot of land for $2,750, and moved to Florida. His mother died without consuming any of the corpus of her legacy, and the plaintiff demanded of the executors to account to him for his share in the same, which they refused to do; whereupon he instituted a proceeding in the court of ordinary calling upon them for a settlement. H...
To continue reading
Request your trial