Harris v. Harris
Decision Date | 17 April 1924 |
Docket Number | 8 Div. 606. |
Citation | 211 Ala. 144,99 So. 913 |
Parties | HARRIS v. HARRIS ET AL. |
Court | Alabama Supreme Court |
Appeal from Circuit Court, Lawrence County; James E. Horton, Jr. Judge.
Bill in equity by R. N. Harris, Sr., against R. N. Harris, Jr., and others. From a decree denying relief, complainant appeals. Affirmed.
Callahan & Harris, of Decatur, for appellant.
Kirk & Rather, of Tuscumbia, for appellees.
The bill was filed by R. N. Harris, Sr., to annul and vacate for fraud a decree of the probate court denying the probate of the will of Mary H. Sherrod, deceased. The case was before us on appeal from decree on demurrer to the bill. The substance of the bill appears in the report of the case. Harris v Harris, 208 Ala. 20, 93 So. 841. We sustained the equity of the bill. Answers were filed by the defendants, heirs at law, denying the several averments on which the right to relief depends. The present appeal is from a final decree on pleadings and proof dismissing the bill.
This brings under review the facts of the case. The record is voluminous, and we seek to set forth only such findings or conclusions of fact as lead to the proper conclusion on the whole case.
Mary H. Sherrod left surviving, as her heirs at law, one brother, R. N. Harris, Sr., two sisters, Mrs. Lucy Brewer and Mrs. Susan Comegys, two nieces, daughters of Ida Allison, a deceased sister, and eight nephews and nieces, children of A. J. Harris, a deceased brother. Mary H. Sherrod left an instrument in writing, duly signed and witnessed, purporting to be her will. The devises and bequests under the will were: To her brother, R. N. Harris, Sr., her one-half interest in a plantation known as the "Lile Place," owned jointly with the decedent; to Miss Lucile Banks, $5,000; to Miss Mary Gibson, $300; to Johnie Smith, colored, $300; and the residue of the estate to all her heirs, share and share alike, under the laws of descent and distribution. R. N. Harris, Sr., was named as executor. He employed counsel and proceeded to propound the will for probate in the probate court of Lawrence county.
R. N. Harris, Jr., a nephew, filed a contest on the grounds of mental incapacity and undue influence. The persons charged with undue influence were not then named. Pending the contest R. N. Harris, Sr., was appointed special administrator. Several members of the family became actively interested. The validity of the will and also deeds of conveyance made theretofore, among them a deed to Mrs. Argie Bowles involving a valuable tract of land, were all brought in question.
Mrs. Lucy Brewer resided in New Orleans. A correspondence between her son, Joseph Brewer, and R. N. Harris, Sr., ensued. Mrs. Brewer thus expressed a purpose to be guided by her brother. Mrs. Susan Comegys, residing at Knoxville, Tenn., came to see him. On May 13th he, with George and Ed Comegys, her sons, in conference with counsel in Decatur, decided the effort to probate the will should be abandoned and action be taken to set aside the deed of Argie Bowles. This suit was brought in the name of James F. Harris, a nephew. On the same date R. N. Harris, Sr., wrote Joe Brewer:
"We decided to have deed set aside, and to take steps to have deed to four hundred acres of land given by Sister Mary to Mrs. Bowles set aside."
On May 24th he addressed a letter to each of the heirs and legatees as follows:
In a letter to Joe Brewer, May 28, 1920, he again wrote: "*** I believe at the time she made her last will she was not compitent [competent] as proof of it her leaving Miss Banks a legacy of $5,000.00 One who had no blood ties and a lady of 35 or 40 years of age who had never visited my sister 1/2 doz. times in her life and two of those visits within a few months of my Sister death but for this proof of incompitancy [incompetency] I would certainly have defended the will. ***"
Meantime an agreement was drawn in New Orleans to be executed between R. N. Harris, Sr., and Thomas Harris, a nephew, as follows:
R. N. Harris, Sr., added the following:
"In event the will is not probated the above agreement is to be effective."
Thus modified, it was fully executed and forwarded to Joseph Brewer with letter of July 9th. This added clause, construed in connection with the agreement as a whole, refers to the property rights of the parties to be affected thereby, and not to the presently operative provisions touching their attitude toward the will contest and suit against Argie Bowles.
Meantime Lucile Banks and Johnie Smith had intervened as legatees, and taken up the tight to probate the will.
The trial came on July 28th, lasted 10 days, and resulted in a mistrial....
To continue reading
Request your trial-
First Nat. Bank of Birmingham v. Brown
...suit and thereby avoid protracted and expensive litigation. Assignments of Error No. 16, 37, 38, 39, and 40. The case of Harris v. Harris, 211 Ala. 144, 99 So. 913, involved the settlement and compromise of a proceeding to contest a will in the probate court wherein the in equity sought to ......
-
Hart v. Jackson
...award of costs to be paid out of an estate to the attorneys representing will contestants who settled the will contest. Harris v. Harris, 211 Ala. 144, 99 So. 913 (1924) (construing the 1907 Code's predecessor to § 43-8-196). In Stanley v. Beck, 242 Ala. 574, 579, 7 So.2d 276, 280 (1942), t......
-
Mitchell v. Parker
...Gayle v. Johnson, 80 Ala. 388; Elmore v. Cunninghame, 208 Ala. 15, 93 So. 814; Powell v. Labry, 210 Ala. 248, 97 So. 707; Harris v. Harris, 211 Ala. 144, 99 So. 913. is nothing to reflect upon the good faith of appellant in propounding the will and prosecuting it after contest, and no circu......
-
Ex parte Boyd
...be a matter of agreement and compromise between parties sui generis represented." Id. at 247, 251 So.2d at 209 (citing Harris v. Harris, 211 Ala. 144, 99 So. 913 (1924)). Judge Bridges, the respondent in this case, claims that he could not enter judgments declaring the 1979 wills null and v......