Hattie v. Potter

• Decision Date: 14 July 1909
• Parties: HATTIE et al. v. POTTER et al.
• Court: Washington Supreme Court

102 P. 1023

54 Wash. 170

HATTIE et al. v. POTTER et al.

Supreme Court of Washington

July 14, 1909

Department 1. Appeal from Superior Court, Lincoln County; W. T. Warren Judge.

Action by Sadie Hattie and others against Frank W. Potter and others. Judgment for defendants, and plaintiffs appeal. Reversed and remanded, with directions.

Wallace Dinsmore and Martin & Wilson, for appellants.

W. H Carlin and Joseph Sessions, for respondents.

MORRIS J.

Orson Tucker died intestate in Lincoln county, Wash., on the 8th day of August, 1906, leaving him surviving his father, John J. Tucker, his sole heir, then an inmate of the Yuba county hospital, at Marysville, Cal. The property of Orson Tucker consisted of lands and personal property situate within Lincoln county, of the value of $20,000, now in the possession of John E. Frazer, his administrator. On August 15, 1906, John J. Tucker gave a power of attorney to Frank W Potter, husband of his daughter, Minnie Potter, being a general power of attorney as to all lands and property of the estate of Orson Tucker. Under this power of attorney Potter went to Lincoln county, and procured the appointment of Frazer as administrator. On November 12, 1906, John J. Tucker gave a deed to his daughter, Minnie Potter, of all the Lincoln county lands descending to him as sole heir of his son, Orson, and on the same day made an assignment to her of all his rights, title, and interests in and to the estate of his son, Orson. John J. Tucker died March 25, 1907, leaving him surviving his daughter, Minnie Potter, and the minor appellants, children of two other daughters now deceased, and thereafter this action was commenced on behalf of said minors to set aside said deed and assignment, upon the grounds of fraud, undue influence, and insufficient mental capacity. Upon issue being joined, trial was had resulting in a decree sustaining the validity of these instruments, and this appeal.

As is usual in cases of this character, the evidence is somewhat conflicting, but we think it is established that John T Tucker lost his wife about 35 years ago. He made no effort to maintain his family together, but, leaving them in custody of others, he spent his time working upon ranches near Marysville. His only home, in so far as it can be said he had one, seems to have been with a bachelor friend named Shay, with whom he lived more or less for 35 years. He seems to have been a good worker, and to have commanded good wages until he began to fail physically; but nobody seems to know what became of the money he earned, unless he spent it in an occasional spree, which seems to have been more or less of a habit with him when he visited Marysville. In addition to his wages, he received money from his mother's estate, but nobody seems to know how much, or what became of it. He continued to work as long as he was able, until, as Shay says, he 'couldn't hold a saw any more,' when Shay obtained a permit for him, and he entered the county hospital as a charity inmate, on June 27, 1904, being at that time 74 years of age. The details of his life at the hospital are naturally very meager, but he seems to have been what would ordinarily be expected of a man of his age and physical condition, until the death of his son, when, according to the testimony of the hospital steward, he had a 'breakdown' mentally and physically, and his entire condition and habit seem to have greatly changed. A few instances of this change are given: Before that time he used to peel potatoes each day in preparation for dinner. Afterwards he either would not or could not; at least he did not. Before the death of his son he was somewhat careful about his appearance; would be the first one to ask for clean clothes from the steward Sunday morning. Afterwards he paid no attention to his clothes, and they would be taken to his bed. He did not seem to realize it was Sunday. He was in the habit of crying; would hold the hands of the steward and cling to him in a helpless manner. At bedtime he would go to the operating room and other rooms, wandering around, and complain of being lost; would forget where he put his tobacco; complain of losing his money. He was somewhat deaf, and had lost the power of speech to some extent, so that it was difficult to understand him. Before his so-called breakdown, he is described as being quite talkative; afterwards he did not seem to want to talk. Before he went to the hospital, he was very exact about his money matters. As his old friend Shay says: 'He was very exact, that old man was; he wanted the last cent.' After the son's death he seemed, the steward testified, to have no idea of money matters. A physician, to whom a hypothetical question was propounded, based upon his physical and mental condition as testified to by some of the witnesses, says the facts would indicate senile dementia.

This was the man from whom this power of attorney was obtained by his son-in-law shortly after the son's death, and by whom later on the deed and assignment were executed, transferring all his property, without consideration, to his daughter. Concerning the execution of these several papers, there is no competent evidence that gives much history of them. We know little about them, except that they were executed. Hence we must depend largely upon all the facts and circumstances surrounding, and in any wise reflecting upon, the acts to determine their character. In cases of this character it is not necessary to establish an absolute loss of mentality. Complainants do not have to prove the insanity of the grantor. It is sufficient to show that the mind was in such a weakened condition, from either mental or physical infirmities, that it could be found there was not sufficient intelligence to understand fully the nature and effect of the transaction complained of; or, if so, that the conveyance was executed under such circumstances that it ought not to be upheld, or as would justify the interference of equity for its cancellation; especially where, as in this case, we find allegations of fraud, and undue influence imposed upon an old man 77 years of age, conveying all his property to one heir to the exclusion of others, and leaving himself stripped of property of the value of $20,000, and continuing to be an inmate of a county poorhouse until his death. Such a transaction is upon its face of doubtful propriety, and justifies a careful scrutiny into its fairness. Such a man as the evidence shows John J. Tucker to have been at the time of the execution of these instruments could easily have been imposed upon; and the inference may well be drawn, and courts of equity will not be slow to draw it, that they were obtained by fraud or circumvention. A party in such a mental condition is easily exposed to fraudulent designs, so powerless to escape them, and too dull to suspect, that courts deem it their duty to interpose, and that upon the ground of fraud. Van Horn v. Keenan, 28 Ill. 445.

We can find in this record no natural reason for this old man's...