Huls v. Lawrence
Citation | 300 S.W. 1004 |
Decision Date | 03 January 1928 |
Docket Number | No. 16143.,16143. |
Parties | HULS v. LAWRENCE. |
Court | Court of Appeal of Missouri (US) |
Appeal from Circuit Court, Cass County; Ewing Cockrell, Judge.
"Not to be officially reported."
Suit by Phoebe J. Huls, administratrix of the estate of L. J. Nichols, deceased, against Anna May Lawrence. Judgment for plaintiff, and defendant appeals. Affirmed.
W. O. Jackson, of Butler, and Crouch & Crouch, of Harrisonville, for appellant. D. C. Chastain, of Butler, and Hallett & Hallett, of Nevada, Mo., for respondent.
This is an action brought by the administratrix of the estate of L. J. Nichols, deceased, having for its purpose the setting aside of a gift of $6,000.00 made by said Nichols to defendant, on the ground that. Nichols did not have mental capacity to make the gift and that the same was procured through the undue influence of the defendant. The chancellor called a jury to his aid, which in effect, found against defendant on both issues. The court approved and adopted the finding of the jury and entered judgment in favor of plaintiff. Defendant has appealed.
The facts show that plaintiff and defendant are sisters and the only children of L. J. Nichols, deceased, who died intestate; that the gift was made on September 28, 1923, in the form of a check signed by the deceased by his mark; that the check was for $6,000.00 and was drawn on the Hume State Bank in favor of defendant as payee; that the check was signed by deceased at the home of the defendant in the town of Hume the day of its date and that deceased was eighty-two years of age at the time it was executed; that the check represented all the property that deceased possessed save about $600.00 in the bank. Deceased came to Missouri from the state of Illinois more than fifty years ago and settled on a farm near Hume in Bates county, bringing his two daughters with him; at that time his wife was dead and he never remarried. Deceased lived in Bates county until about the year 1889 when he went to Texas and there resided until the month of September, 1923, when he returned to Missouri and lived with defendant and her family until his death. Both of his daughters were married before he went to Texas and defendant and her husband accompanied him to that place. They stayed with him there for a year and a half when they returned to Bates county and lived on a farm near Hume until early in 1923 when they moved to the town of Hume.
While deceased resided in Texas he paid periodical visits to Missouri but did not at any time see or communicate with plaintiff who lived in Nevada, a short distance from Hume. He was a man of high temper and strong determination. The record is not clear as to why he did not communicate with plaintiff. She disclaimed any information on the subject and so far as the testimony shows the only statement that deceased ever made in reference to the matter was to defendant's witness Meeks. This witness testified that he had known deceased for more than fifty years; that the two had lived in the same neighborhood; that the "old gentleman never talked as though there was ill feeling but he spoke of little instances"; that deceased "was rather high tempered man and mighty resolute in anything he undertook"; that deceased told him of an occasion when plaintiff remonstrated with him because he had struck a cow that she was milking with a rock and another when he struck a horse with a trace chain; that plaintiff's remonstrance "made the old man mad." Deceased also told him that he objected when plaintiff wanted to take a trip to Europe. Plaintiff testified "I was unaware that there was any estrangewent," "we never quarreled," The evidence shows that in the year 1909 while deceased was visiting Missouri he gave defendant a life estate in 160 acres of land in Bates county with remainder to the heirs of her body, this land was valued at $6,000.00. About the same time deceased gave plaintiff the sum of $6,000.00 by depositing that amount to her credit in a bank at Nevada. At the time this deposit was made, deceased did not call upon, see or speak to plaintiff.
The facts further shows that deceased had visited the home of defendant in May or June, 1923, and had returned to Texas; that about the last of August of the same year defendant received a telegram from the people with whom deceased was staying in Texas asking her to come after her father as he was sick both physically and mentally; that she and her husband immediately went to Texas, arriving there on September 1st, and brought deceased home.
That deceased told the witness about buying the farm for defendant and giving the money to plaintiff; that on one occasion he heard deceased say that he had given his daughters all that he intended them to have; that he did not know what he would do with the balance; that it would either go to some charity organization or something else. On cross-examination he testified that the peculiar things that deceased did occurred a few days before the latter left for Missouri; that Mr. and Mrs. Lawrence stayed at his house about two and a half hours before he took them and deceased to Houston in his car; that at the time he left, deceased's condition "was very bad"; "it seems that he broke down more than he had ever been, he left crying," telling the witness that he did not have many more days to live and that he would not see the witness any more.
She testified about deceased's coming into their bedroom naked, and about the time he put some of his things in a sack, saying he was going to move. She expressed the opinion that deceased was of unsound mind. She further testified that she heard him say that he had given his daughters all that he intended for them to have. On cross-examination she testified that in her opinion deceased's mind was unsound "the best part of the time," "the last...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Klaber v. Unity School of Christianity
...The defendant concealed the transfer from Mrs. Austin's testamentary beneficiary. Morris v. Morris (Mo.), 4 S.W. (2d) 459; Huls v. Lawrence (Mo. App.), 300 S.W. 1004. (d) Mrs. Austin had no independent advice. Ilgenfritz v. Ilgenfritz, 116 Mo. 429; Caspari v. The First German Church, 82 Mo.......
-
Klaber v. Unity School of Christianity
...(c) The defendant concealed the transfer from Mrs. Austin's testamentary beneficiary. Morris v. Morris (Mo.), 4 S.W.2d 459; Huls v. Lawrence (Mo. App.), 300 S.W. 1004. (d) Mrs. Austin had no independent advice. Ilgenfritz v. Ilgenfritz, 116 Mo. 429; Caspari v. The First German Church, 82 Mo......
-
Jeude v. Eiben
...contends that Dr. Claus was mentally incompetent to make a valid gift subsequent to 1922. In support thereof he cites Huls v. Lawrence (Mo. App.), 300 S.W. 1004, by the Kansas City Court of Appeals. In that case a gift was held invalid on the ground of insufficient mental capacity but an ex......
-
Minturn v. Conception Abbey
... ... one of these may be taken into consideration with other facts ... in determining whether the testator is of such mental ... capacity. [ Huls v. Lawrence, 300 S.W. 1004, 1014, ... 1015, and cases therein cited.] As was stated in 28 R. C. L., ... ... "Mere old age, ... ...