Galt v. Provan

• Decision Date: 23 May 1899
• Citation: 108 Iowa 561,79 N.W. 357
• Parties: GALT v. PROVAN ET AL.
• Court: Iowa Supreme Court

108 Iowa 561

79 N.W. 357

GALT

v.PROVAN ET AL.

Supreme Court of Iowa.

May 23, 1899.

Appeal from district court, Tama county; G. W. Burnham, Judge.

Action to establish and quiet the title of certain lands in the plaintiff. There was a judgment for defendants, and the plaintiff appealed. Affirmed.Endicott & Pratt and Struble & Stiger, for appellant.

A. K. Hitchcock, C. B. Bradshaw, and Preston, Wheeler & Moffit, for appellees.

GRANGER, J.

1. In 1885 John Galt died seised of 160 acres of land in controversy in this suit, known as the “Home Farm.” At his death he left surviving, his widow, Janet Galt, David Galt, who is the father to the plaintiff, Elizabeth Provan, and Jean McCornack. The children, David, Elizabeth, and Jean, are defendants in this case. Defendants Robert Provan and Peter McCornack are, respectively, the husbands of Elizabeth and Jean, and defendant Mary Galt is the present wife of David Galt, the plaintiff being his son by a former marriage. The widow, Janet Galt, is now under the legal guardianship of Robert Provan, who is also defendant in that capacity. Plaintiff's mother died in 1868, soon after which, in pursuance of her request, he went to live with his grandparents, John and Janet Galt, and continued to live with them until the death of his grandfather, in 1885, and afterwards with his grandmother till about February 19, 1895. John Galt died testate, leaving to his widow the home farm, being all his real estate, and all his personal property. Janet Galt, at the death of her husband, was about 77 years of age. Soon after the death of John Galt, plaintiff, with his grandmother, moved to Traer for better educational advantages, and he attended school there and at Des Moines till 1889, when they returned to the farm. Plaintiff took charge of the farm, and was allowed therefor, by his grandmother, $250 per year, for his services. In January, 1892, his grandmother made to him a deed of the farm, which was not filed for record, and in October, 1894, she made a will, in which she gave to each of her three children $1,000, and the remainder of her property to plaintiff. Plaintiff had at all times been industrious, faithful, and kind to his grandparents, and was held in high esteem by his grandmother. Up to 1889 plaintiff had been supported and given good educational advantages, and in return he had given a service and deportment that was entirely satisfactory; and it is to be said that after 1889, when they returned to the farm, and he began to receive wages, the same kindly feeling existed between him and his grandmother. It may be well in this connection to state that up to February, 1895, there was never an unfriendly feeling, misunderstanding, or complaint by any member of the family, including the brother and sisters, as to the plaintiff, and there was at all times friendly intercourse. Up to February 20, 1895, plaintiff remained single. A day or two before that it became known that he was to be married on the 20th, and Elizabeth and Jean, with their husbands, went to the house of David Galt on the morning of the 19th, and informed him of the contemplated marriage of the plaintiff, and it was then thought advisable that there be a settlement as to the matters between plaintiff and his grandmother; and plaintiff's father (David) went to the house of plaintiff and his grandmother, and asked him to take his books, and go home with him, to look over the accounts, which the plaintiff did. On reaching David Galt's house, there were present the sisters and their husbands and David's wife. Upon inquiry the plaintiff made known the facts as to the execution of the deed and will, and plaintiff and his father returned to the grandmother's house, and plaintiff obtained them, and they returned with them. While at David Galt's that day, plaintiff executed a quitclaim deed to his grandmother of the home farm, and also a deed for about 19 acres of land adjoining, that he had purchased with his own earnings; and had also signed and acknowledged the following:

“I, Wm. J. Galt, hereby make the following voluntary admissions: 1st. That I used undue influence on one Janet Galt, widow of John Galt, deceased, and by such influence induced the said Janet Galt to make a certain will on the 9th day of October, A. D. 1894, by which I was a beneficiary and legatee. 2nd. That on the 14th day of January, 1892, through my influence, unduly exercised, the said Janet Galt gave me a certain warranty deed, which I have hereby given to Robert Provan, with my free consent to destroy. [Signed] William J. Galt.

State of Iowa, County of Tama--ss.: On the 19th day of February, A. D. 1895, personally appeared the above-named William J. Galt, and acknowledged his signature to the above instrument to be his voluntary act and deed. [Signed] A. K. Hitchcock, Notary Public in and for Tama County, Ia.”

The deed of Janet Galt to the plaintiff was delivered to Robert Provan, and destroyed. The will was taken by David Galt, and the next day, in pursuance of an understanding with his sisters and their husbands, he took it to his mother, who, in the presence of plaintiff and himself, destroyed it. As a part of the transaction on the 19th of February at the house of David Galt, the following--omitting formal parts--was signed by plaintiff and David Galt and his two sisters: “That for and in consideration of the agreement by the said David Galt, Jean McCornack, and Elizabeth Provan, said parties of the second part, that said Wm. J. Galt, said party of the first part, shall receive one-fourth interest in the estate of John Galt, deceased, and Janet Galt, widow of said John Galt, and the further consideration that the said David Galt, Jean Galt, and Elizabeth Provan, parties of the second part, shall relinquish to the said Wm. J. Galt, and by these presents do relinquish, all their right, title, and interest, either present or future, in the personal property upon the following described real estate, to wit, ‘the east one-half (1/2) of the southeast quarter of section thirty-two (32), township (86) north, of range fourteen (14) west of the 5th P. M.,’ with the exception of the household furniture upon said real property, I, Wm. J. Galt, party of the first part, hereby agree to relinquish all claims upon the estate of John Galt, deceased, and upon the estate of Janet Galt, widow of said John Galt, deceased; and further, that said Wm. J. Galt relinquishes all interest he may have in one certain last will and testament of the said Janet Galt, made and executed on the 9th day of October, A. D. 1894. The said Wm. J. Galt further agrees to deed to the said Janet Galt the certain real estate amounting to eighteen acres, more or less: provided, that, should said Wm. J. Galt at any time in the future make any further claim on the estate of John Galt, deceased, or Janet Galt, the widow of said John Galt, then this instrument to be null and void, and these presents of no effect.” At this time it was also understood that a guardian should be appointed for Janet Galt, and Robert Provan was so appointed, and there was, further, an understanding that plaintiff should lease from the guardian the farm for a cash rent; and in pursuance thereof, in March following, a written lease was executed, signed by plaintiff and the guardian, and the place was so occupied, and one or two payments of rent made thereon. This action was commenced in February, 1896, to set aside the deeds made by plaintiff to his grandmother, and to establish his title to the land deeded by her, and also what he formerly purchased; and the petition charges that the deeds made by plaintiff, and all that was done by him on the 19th day of February, 1895, and in the further carrying out of the agreements that day made, was under duress; that he was told that the obtaining of the deed and will by undue influence was a crime, punishable by imprisonment in the penitentiary; and that one of them said he would prosecute him if it took a farm and another farm on top of it, and also that what he had done would blacken his good name. The answer denies all these averments as to duress or making of threats, and shows that the surrender of the deed and will was voluntary, that plaintiff executed the papers that day signed by him voluntarily, and that the deeds and agreements were made in pursuance of a full and complete settlement. It is further made to appear by the answer that when the deed and will were executed by Janet Galt she was of unsound mind, and incapable of doing such acts, and that they were both the result of undue influence by the plaintiff. The averments as to undue influence and unsoundness of mind are denied.

In considering the question of unsoundness of mind of Mrs. Galt, we can only notice a fraction of the testimony bearing on the question of either side. It may be well to preface what we are to say by this somewhat general statement that the evidence throughout shows that about 1885, when about 77 years of age, and near the time of her husband's death, there was a visible change in her mental condition, manifested particularly by a deficiency of memory. The witnesses on the different sides make the situation appear differently, but unmistakably there was a change, which grew more manifest as the years went by. Mrs. Galt seemed to be a woman of rather marked physical vigor, with good hearing and eyesight. Some of the particular facts relied on to show unsoundness of mind are as follows: “Prior to 1885 she was of independent strong mind and fair memory, sympathetic and demonstrative when her sympathies were excited, especially about her children and relatives; had confidence in her children; was saving, but not penurious; was neat in her habits and person; could carry on a conversation intelligently and connectedly; was not in the habit of repeating old stories to the same person in the same conversation more than once; did not worry about becoming poor; and had full...