Garrison v. Frazier

• Decision Date: 19 November 1901
• Citation: 165 Mo. 40,65 S.W. 229
• Parties: GARRISON et al. v. FRAZIER et al.
• Court: Missouri Supreme Court

65 S.W. 229

165 Mo. 40

GARRISON et al. v. FRAZIER et al.

Supreme Court of Missouri, Division No. 1.

November 19, 1901.

QUIETING TITLE — ACTIONS BETWEEN REMAINDER-MEN — ADVANCEMENTS — PARTIES.

1. Under Rev. St. 1899, § 650, authorizing actions to determine the interest of parties in lands, whether in possession or not, children of a second marriage during the intervening life estate of their mother may maintain an action against the children of a former marriage to determine their interest in land and advancements made to defendants during the life of the common father.

2. A remainder-man who disclaims any interest in a suit to determine the interests of remainder-men is not a necessary party.

Appeal from circuit court, Christian county; Jas. T. Neville, Judge.

Action by Martha J. Garrison and others against Sarah Frazier and others. From a judgment in favor of defendants, plaintiffs appeal. Reversed.

Watson & Gideon, for appellants. Long, Gideon & Gideon, for respondents.

ROBINSON, J.

The question involved on this appeal is the sufficiency of the petition filed, a demurrer to which was sustained by the court below. The children of John B. Garrison, deceased, by a second marriage, and their mother, Martha Garrison, instituted this suit in the Christian circuit court against the defendants, children of John B. Garrison by a former marriage, to quiet title. The petition alleges, in substance, the marriage of plaintiff Martha Garrison with John B. Garrison, and the death of the latter in 1885, leaving surviving him, as the issue of such marriage, the plaintiffs Lee, Ida, Mary, John, and Jessie Garrison; the defendants, Sarah Frazier, Nancy Roberts, George Garrison, William Garrison, and H. F. Garrison, being children of said John B. Garrison by a former marriage. It is alleged that H. F. Garrison makes no claim adverse to the estate of the plaintiffs, and therefore he is not made a defendant. The petition then alleges that said John B. Garrison died seised and possessed of certain real estate, situate in Christian county, of the value of $1,500, which, with the exception of a 40-acre tract in section 10, was occupied by the deceased at the time of his death as a homestead. It is then charged that the defendants during the lifetime of their father received real and personal property by way of advancement equal to their share in his estate, and that defendants claim some title, interest, or estate in and to the land in suit adverse to the plaintiffs. The petition concludes with the prayer that "plaintiffs' interest in the land in controversy be determined, and title to same be vested in them as their interest may appear, and that defendants be forever barred from maintaining any action touching the title to or possession of said land, and for other proper relief." Defendants demurred to the petition on the grounds: First, because the petition does not state sufficient facts to constitute a cause of action; second, because advancements cannot be settled in this kind of proceeding; third, because the petition shows that H. F. Garrison is a necessary party to a complete determination of this action. The court below sustained the demurrer, and defendants, refusing to plead further, suffered a judgment to be entered against them, dismissing their bill. From that judgment plaintiffs appeal, assigning as error the action of the circuit court in sustaining the demurrer and dismissing their suit.

The question for determination is this: Is the act of 1897 (now section 650, Rev. St. 1899) broad enough to authorize the court to determine advancements between remainder-men before the termination of the widow's life estate, or, broadly stated, does the statute apply to parties claiming a remainder prior to the expiration of the intervening life estate? Under this section, plaintiffs contend that this proceeding can be maintained by the children of the second marriage against their half brothers and sisters by their father's first marriage, and this, too, during the intervening life estate of their mother, and that the court is authorized to inquire into advancements made to the...