Giers v. Hudson

• Citation: 143 S.W. 916
• Parties: GIERS v. HUDSON et al.
• Decision Date: 18 December 1912
• Court: Arkansas Supreme Court

143 S.W. 916

GIERS v. HUDSON et al.

Supreme Court of Arkansas.

December 18, 1912.

Appeal from Ouachita Chancery Court; Z. T. Wood, Chancellor.

Suit by Berenice Hudson Giers against G. W. Hudson and another. From a decree dismissing the complaint, complainant appeals. Affirmed.

Among the authorities cited by appellant were the following:

Mulock v. Mulock, 32 N. J. Eq. 348; Thornton v. Ogden, 32 N. J. Eq. 723; Miller v. Simonds, 72 Mo. 669; Ranken v. Patton, 65 Mo. 378; Ford v. Hennessy, 70 Mo. 580; Street v. Goss, 62 Mo. 226; Powers v. Powers, 48 How. Prac. (N. Y.) 389; Bury v. Oppenheim, 26 Bevan, 594; Slocum v. Marshall, 2 Wash. C. C. 397, Fed. Cas. No. 12,953; Carpenter v. Heriot, 1 Edw. 338; Baker v. Bradley, 7 De Gex, M. & G. 597; Wright v. Vanderplank, 1 Jurist (N. S.) 932; Wallace v. Wallace, 2 Drury & Walsh, 470; Archer v. Hudson, 7 Bevan, 557; Hoghton v. Hoghton, 15 Bevan, 278; Berger v. Udall, 31 Barb. (N. Y.) 9; Sears v. Shafer, 6 N. Y. 268; Baldock v. Johnson, 14 Or. 542, 13 Pac. 434; Miller v. Simonds, 5 Mo. App. 33; Bergen v. Udall, 31 Barb. (N. Y.) 9; Ross v. Ross, 6 Hun (N. Y.) 80; Stevens v. Stevens, 10 Kan. App. 259, 62 Pac. 714; Brown v. Burbank, 64 Cal. 99, 27 Pac. 940; White v. Ross, 160 Ill. 56, 43 N. E. 336; Ashtown v. Thompson, 32 Minn. 25, 18 N. W. 918; Dent v. Bennett, 4 Myl. & C. 277; Rockafellow v. Newcomb, 57 Ill. 186; Wright v. Vanderplank, 8 De Gex, M. & G. 133; Taylor v. Taylor, 8 How. 183, 12 L. Ed. 1040; Hylton v. Hylton, 2 Ves. 547; Hatch v. Hatch, 9 Ves. 292; Fish v. Miller, Hoff. Ch. (N. Y.) 267; Gibson v. Jeyes, 6 Ves. 266; Hoghton v. Hoghton, 15 Beav. 299; Archer v. Hudson, 7 Beav. 551; Williams v. Powell, 36 N. C. 460; Chambers v. Cralbe, 34 Beav. 457; Garvins, Adm'r, v. Williams, 44 Mo. 465, 100 Am. Dec. 314; Todd v. Grove, 33 Md. 188; Berdoe v. Dawson, 34 Beav. 603; Hugnen v. Baseley, 2 Lead. Cas. Eq. 556; Pierse v. Waring, 1 P. Wms. 121; Cook v. Lamotte, 15 Beav. 234; Davis v. Dunne, 46 Iowa, 684; Eighmy v. Brock, 126 Iowa, 535, 102 N. W. 444; Chidester v. Turnbull. 117 Iowa, 168, 90 N. W. 583; Mallow v. Walker, 115 Iowa, 238, 88 N. W. 452, 91 Am. St. Rep. 158; Noble v. Moses, 81 Ala. 530, 1 South. 217, 60 Am. Rep. 175; Johnson v. Johnson, 5 Ala. 90; Malone v. Kelley, 54 Ala. 532; Juzan v. Toulmin, 9 Ala. 662, 44 Am. Dec. 448; Boney v. Hollingsworth, 23 Ala. 690; Thompson v. Lee, 31 Ala. 292; Cleveland v. Pollard, 37 Ala. 556; Dickinson v. Bradford, 59 Ala. 581, 31 Am. Rep. 23; Waddell v. Lanier, 62 Ala. 347; Shipman v. Furniss, 69 Ala. 555, 44 Am. Rep. 528; Jenkins v. Pye, 12 Pet. 241, 9 L. Ed. 1070; Allore v. Jewell, 94 U. S. 506, 24 L. Ed. 260; Voltz v. Voltz, 75 Ala. 555; Todd v. Grove, 33 Md. 195; Williams v. Williams, 63 Md. 371; Cook v. Lamotte, 15 Beav. 239; Everitt v. Everitt, L. R. 10 Equity, 405; Prideaux v. Lonsdale, 1 De Gex, J. & Smith, 433; Allcard v. Skinner, L. R. 36 Ch. D. 181; Rhodes v. Bates, L. R. 1 Chancery App. 252; Hugenin v. Beasley, 14 Ves. 273; Hall v. Hall, L. R. 8 Chancery App. 436; Berkmeyer v. Kellerman, 32 Ohio St. 239, 30 Am. Rep. 577; Harrison v. Guest, 6 De Gex, M. & Gr. 452; Cocking v. Pratt, 1 Ves. Sr. 400; Keith v. Kellam (C. C.) 35 Fed. 243; Cornish v. Johns, 74 Ark. 231, 85 S. W. 764; Chambers v. Chambers, 139 Ind. 111, 38 N. E. 334; Sayles v. Christie, 187 Ill. 420, 58 N. E. 480; Oliphant v. Liversidge, 142 Ill. 160, 30 N. E. 334; Slocum and Wife v. Marshall, 2 Wash. C. C. 400, Fed. Cas. No. 12,953; Million and Wife v. Taylor, 38 Ark. 428; Gillespie and Wife v. Holland, 40 Ark. 28, 48 Am. Rep. 1; Hightower et al. v. Nuber, 26 Ark. 604; Imboden v. Hunter, 23 Ark. 622, 79 Am. Dec. 116; Davoue v. Fanning, 2 John. Ch. (N. Y.) 252; Wormley v. Wormley, 8 Wheat. 421, 5 L. Ed. 651; Michoud v. Girod, 4 How. 503, 11 L. Ed. 1076; Lewis v. Hilleman, 18 Eng. Law & Eq. 34; Fox v. Mackreth, 1 Lead. Cas. in Eq. 159; Van Epps v. Van Epps, 9 Paige (N. Y.) 237; Dobson v. Racey, 3 Sandf. Ch. (N. Y.) 60; Voorhees v. Presbyterian Church of Amsterdam, 8 Barb. (N. Y.) 136; Hawley v. Cramer, 4 Cow. (N. Y.) 717; White v. Ward and Wife, 26 Ark. 446; Lord Hardwicke v. Vernon, 4 Ves. Jr. 411, 14 Ves. Jr. 504; Michoud et al. v. Girod et al., 4 How. 553, 11 L. Ed. 1076; Prevost v. Gratz, 6 Wheat. 481, 5 L. Ed. 311; Ringo et al. v. Binns et al., 10 Pet. 269, 9 L. Ed. 420; Church v. Marine Ins. Co., 1 Mason, 341, Fed. Cas. No. 2,711; Hindman v. O'Conner, 54 Ark 632, 16 S. W. 1052, 13 L. R. A. 490; Michoud v. Girod, 4 How. 504, 11 L. Ed. 1076; Revett v. Harvey, 1 Simons & Stuart, 502; Torrey v. Bank of Orleans, 9 Paige (N. Y.) 663; Gibson v. Herriott, 55 Ark. 85, 17 S. W. 589, 29 Am. St. Rep. 17; West v. Waddill, 33 Ark. 575; Hindman v. O'Connor, 54 Ark. 627, 16 S. W. 1052, 13 L. R. A. 490; Reeder v. Meredith, 78 Ark. 111, 93 S. W. 558, 115 Am. St. Rep. 22; Burel v. Baker, 89 Ark. 168, 116 S. W. 181; Haynes v. Montgomery, 132 S. W. 651.

Among the authorities cited by appellees were the following:

Jenkins v. Pye, 12 Pet. 241, 9 L. Ed. 1070; Towson v. Moore, 173 U. S. 20, 19 Sup. Ct. 332, 43 L. Ed. 599; Sullivan v. Sullivan, 21 Month. Law Rep. 544, Fed. Cas. No. 13,598; Noble v. Moses, 74 Ala. 619; Noble v. Moses, 81 Ala. 541, 1 South. 217, 60 Am. Rep. 175; Murray v. Hilton, 8 App. D. C. 284; Finucan v. Kendig, 109 Ill. 208; White v. Ross, 160 Ill. 73, 43 N. E. 336; Ferns v. Chapman, 211 Ill. 607, 71 N. E. 1106; Couchman v. Couchman, 98 Ky. 114, 32 S. W. 283; Hutchins v. Heywood, 50 N. H. 498; Bogle's Estate, 9 Wkly. Notes Cas. (Pa.) 259; Woodward's Estate, 1 Chest. Co. Rep. (Pa.) 425; Jordan's Appeal, 54 Pa. 484; Saufley v. Jackson, 16 Tex. 583; Millican v. Millican, 24 Tex. 447; Goar v. Thompson, 19 Tex. Civ. App. 335, 47 S. W. 61; Muzzy v. Tompkinson, 2 Wash. 632, 27 Pac. 456, 28 Pac. 652; Pusey v. Gardner, 21 W. Va. 479; Taylor v. Taylor, 8 How. 201, 12 L. Ed. 1040; Godden v. Kimmell, 99 U. S. 210, 25 L. Ed. 431; Badger v. Badger, 2 Cliff. 154, 155, Fed. Cas. No. 718.

Undue influence. — Towson v. Moore, 173 U. S. 17, 19 Sup. Ct. 332, 43 L. Ed. 597; Meyer v. Jacobs (C. C.) 123 Fed. 912; Jenkins v. Pye, 12 Pet. 241, 9 L. Ed. 1070; Jenkins v. Pye, 12 Pet. 253, 9 L. Ed. 1070; Couchman, Adm'r, v. Couchman, 98 Ky. 115, 32 S. W. 283; Taylor v. Taylor, 8 How. 183, 12 L. Ed. 1040; Millican v. Millican, 24 Tex. 427; Pusey v. Gardner, 21 W. Va. 469; Taylor v. Taylor et al., 8 How. 201, 12 L. Ed. 1040; Mulock v. Mulock, 32 N. J. Eq. 348; Thornton v. Ogden, 32 N. J. Eq. 723; Miller v. Simonds, 72 Mo. 669; Ranken v. Patton, 65 Mo. 378; Ford v. Hennessy, 70 Mo. 580; Street v. Goss, 62 Mo. 226; Powers v. Powers, 48 How. Prac. (N. Y.) 389; Bury v. Oppenheim, 26 Bevan, 594; Slocum v. Marshall, 2 Wash. C. C. 397, Fed. Cas. No. 12,953; Carpenter v. Heriot, 1 Edw. 338; Baker v. Bradley, 7 De Gex, McNorton & Gordon, 597; Wright v. Vanderplank, 1 Jurist N. S. 932; Wallace v. Wallace, 2 Drury & Walsh, 470; Archer v. Hudson, 7 Bevan, 557; Houghton v. Houghton, 15 Bevan, 278; Berger v. Udall, 31 Barb. (N. Y.) 9; Sears v. Shafer, 6 N. Y. 268; Baldock v. Johnson, 14 Or. 542, 13 Pac. 434; Miller v. Simonds, 5 Mo. App. 33; Bergen v. Udall, 31 Barb. (N. Y.) 9; Ross v. Ross, 6 Hun (N. Y.) 80; Stevens v. Stevens, 10 Kan. App. 259, 62 Pac. 714; Dorsey v. Wolcott, 173 Ill. 539, 50 N. E. 1015; Francis v. Wilkinson, 147 Ill. 370, 35 N. E. 150; Maynard v. Tyler, 168 Mass. 107, 46 N. E. 413; Trost v. Dingler, 118 Pa. 259, 12 Atl. 296, 4 Am. St. Rep. 593; McFadin v. Catron, 120 Mo. 252, 25 S. W. 506; Rozell v. Vansyckle, 11 Wash. 79, 39 Pac. 270; Parrish v. Parrish, 33 Or. 486, 54 Pac. 352; Wise v. Foote, 81 Ky. 10; Henry v. Armstrong, 18 C. D. 668; Allcard v. Skinner, 36 Ch. Div. 183; Villers v. Beaumont, 1 Vern. 100; Toker v. Toker, 31 Bea. 629, 244, 3 D. J. & S. 487; Dorsey v. Wolcott, 173 Ill. 550, 50 N. E. 1015; Hugenin v. Beasley, 14 Ves. 273; Cook v. Lamotte, 15 Beav. 324; Conley v. Nailor (1886) 118 U. S. 127, 134, 6 Sup. Ct. 1001, 30 L. Ed. 112; Ralston v. Turpin (1889), 129 U. S. 663, 670, 9 Sup. Ct. 420, 32 L. Ed. 747; Mackall v. Mackall (1890) 135 U. S. 167, 172, 173, 10 Sup. Ct. 705, 34 L. Ed. 84.

Family Settlements Favored in Equity. — Martin v. Martin, 135 S. W. 348; Pate v. Johnson, 15 Ark. 275; Turner v. Davis, 41 Ark. 270; Mooney v. Rowland, 64 Ark. 19, 40 S. W. 259; La Cotts v. Quertermous, 84 Ark. 610, 107 S. W. 167; Smith v. Smith, 36 Ga. 184, 91 Am. Dec. 761; Smith v. Taner, 32 S. C. 259, 10 S. E. 1008; Good Fellows v. Campbell, 17 R. I. 402, 22 Atl. 307.

Powell & Taylor, for appellant. Gaughan & Sifford and Warren & Smith, for appellees.

McCULLOCH, C. J.

On August 31, 1909, the plaintiff, Mrs. Berenice Hudson Giers, instituted this action in the chancery court of Ouachita county against her father, Dr. G. W. Hudson, of Camden, Ark., to cancel two deeds which she and her brother, Woodland Hudson, had, on September 24, 1907, executed to her father, conveying to him their several interests in certain real estate formerly owned by their mother, Dr. Hudson's deceased wife, and in which Dr. Hudson had an interest as tenant by the curtesy. In his answer Dr. Hudson stated that one of the deeds was intended as a conveyance to him in trust for his said children for certain purposes, and upon the prayer of plaintiff's complaint, without objection on the part of the defendant, the court canceled that deed. So that feature of the case has passed out, leaving only the issue as to the deed conveying the lot which is known as the "Home" place. At the time of her death in the year 1900 Mrs. Hudson owned the "Home" place, which had been conveyed to her some years before that time by her mother, Mrs. Woodland. She also owned another improved lot, known as the "Thal" place, which Dr. Hudson had purchased and paid for and caused to be conveyed to her. Both of these places are situated in the city of Camden. She also owned an undivided third of certain other property embraced in the other deed which the court canceled. Dr. Hudson had, of course, a curtesy estate in the "Thal"...