Hall v. Knappenberger

• Decision Date: 19 March 1889
• Citation: 11 S.W. 239,97 Mo. 509
• Parties: HALL v. KNAPPENBERGER.
• Court: Missouri Supreme Court

11 S.W. 239

97 Mo. 509

HALL v. KNAPPENBERGER.

Supreme Court of Missouri.

March 19, 1889.

GIFTS — FRAUD — VARIANCE.

1. Where a person of the age of 80 years, infirm, feeble, and usually under the influence of opiates as medicine, gives to his trusted friend, agent, and adviser, in whom he reposes great confidence, a promissory note comprising substantially all his personal estate, the burden of proving the fairness and validity of the transaction is upon the donee, and this rule applies to an action at law by the administrator of the donor against the donee to recover the proceeds of the note collected by the defendant.

2. An answer in such an action alleging the gift of the note is not supported by proof of a written assignment by the alleged donor, "for value received," directed to a banker, the custodian of the note, instructing him to deliver it to defendant.

Appeal from circuit court, Carroll county; JAMES M. DAVIS, Judge.

On rehearing. Former opinion, 6 S. W. Rep. 381. Action by H. S. Hall, administrator de bonis non, etc., of John Reeves, deceased, against John Knappenberger, to recover the amount of a promissory note of $5,000, alleged to be the property of plaintiff's intestate, collected by defendant. Trial by the court, and finding and judgment for the defendant, from which plaintiff appeals. The questions discussed in the opinion were raised by instructions tendered by plaintiff and refused. The facts appear fully in the former opinion, in which the judgment was affirmed, the court holding several instructions to have been properly refused. The plaintiff obtained a rehearing.

Hale & Sons, Prosser Ray, and A. M. Hough, for appellant. J. L. Mirick and Kinley & Wallace, for respondent.

SHERWOOD, J.

Action by plaintiff, as administrator de bonis non of the estate of John Reeves, deceased, to recover from defendant the amount of a promissory note for $5,000, collected by him during the life-time of the decedent, which note the petition charges to have been obtained by defendant through covinous methods, and by undue influence. The answer pleads that the note was a gift, etc.

1. The evidence offered to support the plea of a gift had no tendency in that direction, since it showed a written assignment of the note "for value received," and directed a banker in Illinois, who was the bailee of the note, to deliver it to defendant. Of course, evidence of such a character could no more sustain the plea of a gift of the note than would...