Hawes v. Williams

• Decision Date: 20 February 1899
• Citation: 92 Me. 483,43 A. 101
• Parties: HAWES v. WILLIAMS et al.
• Court: Maine Supreme Court

43 A. 101

92 Me. 483

HAWES

v. WILLIAMS et al.

Supreme Judicial Court of Maine.

Feb. 20, 1899.

(Official.)

Report from supreme judicial court, Somerset county.

Bill by Andrew Hawes, administrator, against Hiram B. Williams, administrator, and others, to recover certain money alleged to be wrongfully diverted from the estate and heirs of Emeline Williams. Bill dismissed.

The material facts are as follows: October 9, 1888, Ira W. Page obtained from Lawrence Williams, since deceased, $1,500, and gave the latter an absolute deed of a lot of land and buildings in Hartland, taking back a written agreement, which was not sealed or acknowledged and not recorded, to convey the same premises by quitclaim deed to said Page if the latter paid him or his legal representatives $15 per month,—with the option of paying more and oftener,—until he should have paid $1,500, with interest monthly on the same, and should pay all taxes and insurance on the premises, which he was meantime to occupy. The agreement provided that, in case of failure on the part of Page to pay as stipulated, the sums paid were to go as rent, and his rights of occupancy and to a deed were to be forfeited. This agreement is as follows:

"Hartland, October 9th, 1888. "If Ira W. Page or his legal representatives shall pay, or cause to be paid, to me or my legal representatives, fifteen dollars per month, until he shall have paid fifteen hundred dollars, with interest monthly on the same, and pay all taxes and insurances on the buildings and lot in Hartland village that he has this day deeded to me, keep said buildings in good repair, I hereby bind myself, my heirs and assigns, to give him, his heirs or assigns, a quitclaim deed of said premises. The first payment to be made this day, and a payment of fifteen dollars on or before the same day of each succeeding month, until the above-named sum and interest shall be fully paid. It is also agreed and understood that said Page has the right to pay larger sums and oftener if he chooses to. But all payments, for the purpose of reckoning interest, will be considered as if paid at the end of each year. I also agree that said Page shall occupy and have the use of said premises so long as he performs the above conditions, and no longer, and, if he fails to perform all of said conditions, the sums that may have been paid are to go as rent, and thereby forfeits all claim to a deed or right to occupy said premises.

"Lawrence Williams."

Page made his payments regularly to Lawrence Williams during the latter's life, and after his decease to Hiram B. Williams, the administrator and one of the defendants. He also paid the taxes and insurance, and never forfeited any of his rights under the terms of said agreement.

When Lawrence Williams died intestate, March 22, 1893, Page had paid $810. Then he paid Hiram B. Williams installments amounting to $150; and finally the balance of said $1,500 and interest to wit, $868.32, was paid to said Hiram B. Williams about June 13, 1895, upon delivery of a quitclaim deed from the heirs of Lawrence Williams to said Page.

Hiram B. Williams, who was the administrator of the estate of Lawrence Williams, claimed in this transaction to act as agent and attorney of the other heirs and as an heir himself of Lawrence Williams, treating said land and buildings as real estate of the deceased, with which his administrator had no concern.

Lawrence Williams left a widow, Emeline Williams, but no heirs of his body.

Said Emeline Williams died October 31, 1893, intestate. The plaintiff is her administrator de bonis non, and claimed that the deed of the premises held by said Lawrence Williams and his said agreement held by Page constituted an equitable mortgage of the property, and that the balance of money coming to him from Page under said agreement was an unpaid balance of money lent, which was payable to the administrator of said Lawrence Williams as his legal representative, and should have been treated and administered as personal assets of said estate.

The defendants contended that Lawrence Williams, deceased, was the lawful owner of the Page premises, and that the same descended to them as real estate. The answer of the defendants so asserted, and admitted that they have taken the money received from Page by said Hiram B. Williams, both the balance of said $1,500 and interest paid by Page when their quitclaim deed was delivered to him, and the $150 previously paid in installments by said Page to said Hiram B. Williams.

The plaintiff thereupon contended that the heirs of Lawrence Williams have thus obtained the whole amount due him, when he died, from said Page, on account of said $1,500 and interest, to wit, $1,018.32; whereas, they were, in law and equity, entitled to have and receive only one-half of the same, and the other moiety should have been paid to the plaintiff, as administrator of the estate of said Emeline Williams, for distribution among her heirs.

Argued before PETERS, C. J., and EMERY, HASKELL, WHITEHOUSE, STROUT, and SAVAGE, JJ.

S. J. & L. L. Walton and B. D. & H. M. Verrill, for plaintiff.

D. D. Stewart, for defendants.

HASKELL, J. One Ira W. Page, being the owner of certain land, conveyed the same in fee to Lawrence Williams, then alive, but now dead. At the same time Williams gave Page a writing, not under seal, agreeing, among other things, that, if Page should pay him $15 a month until he shall have paid $1,500 with interest, he (Williams) would reconvey the land. The...