German Ins. Co. of Freeport v. Bartlett

Decision Date20 December 1900
Citation188 Ill. 165,58 N.E. 1075
PartiesGERMAN INS. CO. OF FREEPORT, ILL., et al. v. BARTLETT et al.
CourtIllinois Supreme Court
OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE

1. As against creditors of a deceased husband seeking to subject to their claim property which he had conveyed to his wife, declarations of his that he was indebted to her, that the property was bought with her money, and that he held the title as trustee for her, are admissible, having been made before his indebtedness to such creditors was contracted, and without reference thereto.

2. One may prefer his wife to other creditors, the preference being in good faith, and for a valid debt.

3. A wife, to whom her husband conveys property, is not estopped to claim it as against his creditors who obtained judgments against him after recording of her deed, because she did not record at once a declaration of trust made by him, and did not record the deed until 30 days after it was obtained; the creditors not being misled thereby, and the withholding from record not being due to any agreement between her and him.

Appeal from appellate court, Second district.

Suit by the German Insurance Company of Freeport, Ill., and another against Frederic R. Bartlett and others. From a judgment of the appellate court affirming a decree dismissing the bill (89 Ill.App. 469), complainants appeal. Affirmed.

The German Insurance Company of Freeport, Ill., on March 19, 1896, recovered a judgment against Frederic Bartlett in the circuit court of Stephenson county for $5,773.88, and the Farmers' & Merchants' Bank, of the same place, on March 24, 1896, recovered a judgment against Frederic and Frederic R. Bartlett, in the same court, for $4,020.24. Executions were issued upon said judgments, and delivered to the sheriff of said county, who afterwards returned the same nulla bona. On August 3, 1896, the said insurance company and bank filed a creditors' bill in the circuit court of said county against Frederic Bartlett, Isabella J. Bartlett, and others to subject to the payment of said judgments certain real and personal property situated in said county, the title of which was held by Isabella J. Bartlett, wife of Frederic Bartlett. On October 15, 1897, Frederic Bartlett died intestate, leaving, him surviving, Isabella J., his widow, and Frederic R. and Isabella H. Bartlett, his children and only heirs at law. On March 6, 1898, Isabella J. Bartlett died testate, willing all her property to her daughter, Isabella H. Bartlett, who was also made her executrix, and who afterwards qualified as such. Subsequently Frederic R. Bartlett, Isabella H. Bartlett, and Isabella H. Bartlett as executrix of the will of Isabella J. Bartlett, deceased, were substituted as parties defendant to said bill. The case was tried upon bill, answers, replications, and the master's report, and a decree was entered holding said real estate to be the property of Isabella H. Bartlett, and not subject to the payment of said judgments, and dismissing the bill of complaint as to Frederic R. Bartlett, and directing that the complainants pay one half of the costs, and Isabella H. Bartlett the other half. The complainants perfected an appeal to the appellate court for the Second district, where said decree was affirmed, and they have prosecuted an appeal to this court from such judgment of affirmance.

Isabella J. Bartlett (formerly Isabella J. Robinson) was the only child of Thomas and Margaret J. Robinson. On the 2nd day of August, 1858, she married Frederic Bartlett, and they for a time lived with her parents in Freeport. On April 3, 1866, Margaret J. Robinson and Thomas Robinson conveyed to Isabella J. Bartlett lot 4 in block 1 in Guiteau's addition to Freeport, and on January 13, 1862, Denard Shockley conveyed to Isabella J. Bartlett the west half of lot 5 in block 1 in Guiteau's addition to Freeport, and on April 30, 1860, Denard Shockley conveyed to Frederic Bartlett the east half of lot 5 in block 1 in Guiteau's addition to Freeport. On lot 4 there was located a brick dwelling house, which Frederic and Isabella J. Bartlett occupied as their homestead for a number of years prior to November 8, 1880, on which date Isabella J. Bartlett and Frederic Bartlett sold and conveyed said lots 4 and 5 to Lehman A. Warner for the expressed consideration of $5,500, which was paid in merchandise, and from the sale of which was afterwards realized $7,500 in cash. On the 15th day of October, 1869, the Connecticut Mutual Life Insurance Company issued a 20-year endowment policy on the life of Frederic Bartlett for $5,000, for the use and benefit of Isabella J. Bartlett, which policy provided that, if the insured should survive the term of 20 years, said sum should be paid to him; that said policy should not be assigned, but that the same might be surrendered to the company and discharged at any time by Isabella J. Bartlett. On October 9, 1888, the sum of $4,740.25 was paid to Isabella J. Bartlett and Frederic Bartlett in full for the surrender of said policy. On February 1, 1882, L.L. Munn and wife conveyed to Frederic Bartlett lots 1, 2, 13, and 14 in block 2 in Turner's addition to Freeport for the consideration of $4,000. In 1885-86 a commodious dwelling was erected by Frederic Bartlett upon said lots 1, 2, 13, and 14, and from the time of the completion thereof to the commencement of this suit the same was occupied by Frederic Bartlett and family as a homestead. On January 16, 1896, Frederic Bartlett and Isabella J. Bartlett, his wife, conveyed said homestead property to Frederic R. Bartlett, their son, and on the same day Frederic R. Bartlett conveyed the same to Isabella J. Bartlett, his mother, by warranty deeds, which were filed for record February 10, 1896, and are the deeds sought to be set aside by complainants as fraudulent. On the 5th day of August, 1893, Frederic and Isabella J. Bartlett and George C. Fry had a conversation, in the presence of Frederic R. Bartlett, concerning the financial relations of Frederic and Isabella J. Bartlett, in which Frederic Bartlett stated that the money which bought and paid for the homestead above referred to belonged to Isabella J. Bartlett, and was derived from her parents and from a certain endowment policy of insurance on Frederic's life in which Isabella J. was the beneficiary. These statements showed that by agreement between Frederic and Isabella J. he invested said funds in said homestead, and was to take title thereto in the name of his wife. At the same time Isabella J. stated to Fry that she had sent for him because she was worried, having learned for the first time that day that the title to the property where they lived was not in her name, but in the name of her husband. The amount of her property so used was determined by her and her husband to be $12,500, and Frederic on that day executed to his wife a judgment note for that amount; also a written declaration of trust setting forth that he held said homestead in trust for her, which is as follows: State...

To continue reading

Request your trial
11 cases
  • Haskell v. Siegmund
    • United States
    • United States Appellate Court of Illinois
    • October 20, 1960
    ...(3d ed. 1940). The tests for admissibility of declarations against pecuniary interest are set forth in German Insurance Co. v. Bartlett, 1900, 188 Ill. 165, 173, 58 N.E. 1075, 1077: '* * * (1) The declarant must be dead; (2) the declaration must have been against the pecuniary interest of t......
  • Rinehart v. Hall., (No. 8306)
    • United States
    • West Virginia Supreme Court
    • April 28, 1936
    ...1008; Feig v. Meyers, 102 Pa. 10; Grant v. Cherry, 199 la. 164, 201 N. W. 588; German Insurance Co. v. Bartlett, 188 111. 165, 58 N. E. 1075, 80 Am. St. Rep. 172; Ellis v. Thompson, (Mo. Sup.) 264 S. W. 804; Gulp v. Kiene, 101 Kan. 511, 168 P. 1097; Long v. Duncan, 186 la. 126, 172 N. W. 16......
  • Rinehart v. Hall
    • United States
    • West Virginia Supreme Court
    • April 28, 1936
    ... ... 10; Grant v ... Cherry, 199 Iowa 164, 201 N.W. 588; German Insurance ... Co. v. Bartlett, 188 Ill. 165, 58 N.E. 1075, 80 ... ...
  • Mendelson v. Comm'r of Internal Revenue
    • United States
    • U.S. Tax Court
    • July 31, 1969
    ...believed he owed the petitioner money, it is nevertheless admissible as a declaration against pecuniary interest. German Ins. Co. v. Bartlett, 188 Ill. 165, 58 N.E. 1075 (1900); 29 Am.Jur.2d, Evidence, secs. 617-620; 31A C.J.S., Evidence, secs. 217-224; cf. Martin v. Savage Truck Line, 121 ......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT