Dent v. Long

• Decision Date: 30 April 1890
• Citation: 90 Ala. 172,7 So. 640
• Parties: DENT ET AL. v. LONG ET AL.
• Court: Alabama Supreme Court

7 So. 640

90 Ala. 172

DENT ET AL. v. LONG ET AL.

Supreme Court of Alabama

April 30, 1890

Appeal from chancery court, Walker county; COBBS, Chancellor.

Hewitt, Walker & Porter, Henry Jackson, and Rice & Wiley, for appellants.

Smith & Lowe, for appellees.

CLOPTON J.

On April 2, 1879, Eliza Dent and W. B. W. Dent executed to B. M Long a conveyance of the lands mentioned in the bill, situate in Walker county, Ala., upon the expressed consideration of $6,000. Eliza Dent died in June, 1881. Appellants, who are her children and heirs, by the bill, seek the rescission of the contract of sale, and cancellation of the conveyance, on the alleged grounds that Mrs. Dent was mentally incapable of making a contract, and that her mental deficiencies were unduly acted upon by W. B. W. Dent, her son, who, the bill alleges, was subject to the control and influence of Long, and was his agent or instrument in procuring the conveyance. The specific allegations are substantially that Long caused Dent to be arrested on a criminal charge, who, having received information while under arrest, in the custody of the officer, that his mother, who lived in Newman, Ga., was in a dying condition, and that he must hasten to Georgia if he expected to see her alive, went to Long and informed him of his distressing condition. Long, seeing the opportunity to obtain the lands which he had long desired, proposed to Dent to arrange for him to go to Georgia, by suspending the criminal prosecution and becoming surety for his appearance, if he would procure from his mother a conveyance of the lands to him in consideration of $5,000, taking in part payment certain lands in Carroll county, Ga., owned by Long; and, if Dent would also convey the land which he owned, he would surrender all the claims he had against him, and permanently suspend the prosecution. Dent went to Georgia, represented to his mother his arrest and prosecution, and urged her to come to his relief by making the conveyance, being the only mode by which he could escape conviction and disgrace; and also that Mrs. Dent, with a mind so enfeebed by old age and sickness as to be unable to contract intelligently, and a will so impaired that she could not resist the appeal of her son, was thereby induced to execute the conveyance.

The testimony is very voluminous, covering 870 pages of transcript paper, and conflicting in many respects. A critical review of it would unnecessarily extend this opinion, and serve no useful purpose in the decision of other cases. We shall therefore be content to state our conclusions. While the opinions of the witnesses greatly vary as to the mental condition of Mrs. Dent, a variance probably produced by her physical and mental condition at different times, it does not appear from the evidence that at the time of making the conveyance she was mentally incapable to contract. The facts of calling upon Mrs. Wood, one of the complainants, to witness the deed, of informing Joseph H Dent, another of the complainants, several hours afterwards, of what she had done; of giving him the notes which Long had given for the unpaid purchase money, saying that if she kept them W. B. W. Dent would get them from her; and telling, some time afterwards, the witness Clark, who is unimpeached and uncontradicted, though Mrs. Wood was present, that she had sold her land in Alabama, assigning as her reason that the lands in Alabama were remote, yielded no income, and she had to send money to pay the taxes, while those in Georgia, which she received in exchange, were near, and would yield an income,-manifest that she understood the character of the transaction, and comprehended the nature of the conveyance and the consequences which would ensue. In order to prove undue influence, complainants rely entirely upon the testimony of W. B. W. Dent, who testifies that he told his mother that he was under arrest, and that his only chance to escape criminal prosecution was to consummate the trade proposed by Long. If he made such statement, he stated what was manifestly untrue. It is true that Long caused him to be arrested in February, 1879, for selling mortgaged property. Waiving a preliminary examination, he was placed under bond to appear at the circuit court to answer to an indictment. Long was not a surety on his bond, but the evidence establishes that the circuit court convened on the first Monday in March, and continued in session only one week, during which time Long made strenuous efforts to procure the return of a true bill. The grand jury failed to find an indictment, whereby Dent and his sureties were released by operation of law. On the day succeeding the adjournment of the grand jury, he left for Georgia, of his own accord, without any arrangement or understanding with Long concerning the purchase of the lands. He was not under arrest, and no criminal prosecution was pending at the time of making the conveyance. If Mrs. Dent was unduly influenced to sign the conveyance, it...