Jamison v. Culligan

Decision Date14 June 1899
CitationJamison v. Culligan, 151 Mo. 410, 52 S.W. 224 (Mo. 1899)
PartiesJAMISON v. CULLIGAN et ux.
CourtMissouri Supreme Court

Appeal from circuit court, Jackson county; John W. Henry, Judge.

Action by Robert R. Jamison, administrator, against Edmund Culligan and Margaret Culligan. Judgment for defendants, and plaintiff appeals. Affirmed.

A. M. Allen and W. F. Allen, for appellant. C. H. Nearing, for respondents.

VALLIANT, J.

This suit was commenced by Jeremiah Collins and Martha, his wife, as plaintiffs. Martha died, and afterwards Jeremiah died. Jamison was appointed administrator of Jeremiah's estate, and the suit was revived in his name as sole plaintiff. The administrator filed an amended petition, in three counts, which, omitting descriptions of land, is as follows: "Plaintiff states that on the 15th day of September, 1883, Jeremiah Collins and Martha Collins, deceased, were the owners and in possession of the following described real estate, to wit [description]. Plaintiff states that on or about the ___ day of ___, 1888, Jeremiah Collins and Martha Collins, deceased, borrowed the sum of two hundred dollars from Louis Holmes, and the same was secured by deed of trust filed of record in the recorder's office of Jackson county, Mo., in Book B326, at page 288, and they at divers other times borrowed from said Holmes to the amount of one hundred and twenty-five dollars, and that said Jeremiah Collins and Martha Collins, deceased, sold to the defendants herein, Edmund Culligan and Margaret Culligan, his wife, for the sum of six hundred and fifty dollars, a part of the land hereinbefore described, as follows [description], in order to pay said Holmes. After paying said Holmes, there remained a balance due plaintiff, the sum of two hundred dollars. Wherefore plaintiff prays judgment for the sum of two hundred dollars, and interest thereon from January 19, 1891, at 6 per cent. per annum, against said defendants. Plaintiff further says Jeremiah Collins was over one hundred years of age, and his wife, Martha, about eighty years of age; that on or about the 6th day of June, 1892, the defendants, Edmund Culligan and Margaret Culligan, his wife, and C. H. Nearing, trustee, filed for record in the recorder's office of Jackson county, Mo., a deed of trust in Book B482, at page 208, purporting to secure a note of one hundred and fifty dollars, on the following described real estate, to wit [description]. Plaintiff says that the deed of trust is wholly without consideration, and the same was not the act and deed of the said Jeremiah Collins, deceased. Plaintiff says that the signature of Martha Collins to the deed of trust was obtained through threats and fear that said defendants would do her great bodily harm, and further says that the pretended signature of Jeremiah Collins, deceased, is not his, and was never authorized by him; that he never signed any deed of trust purporting to bear his signature, or any note secured by said pretended deed of trust, and said deed of trust purporting to secure them was and is fraudulent and void, and casts a cloud upon plaintiff's title. And said plaintiff says that at the date of the alleged deed of trust the said Jeremiah Collins, deceased, was of unsound mind and incapable of contracting. Wherefore plaintiff prays that said pretended deed of trust be declared null and void and held for naught, and the note be ordered to be delivered up and canceled. Plaintiff further states that the deed of trust on the 21st day of November, 1892, executed to C. H. Nearing for Edmund Culligan and Margaret Culligan, his wife, on the following real estate, to wit [description], recorded in the office of the recorder of Jackson county, Mo., in Book B482, at page 526, which deed of trust purported to secure a...

Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI

Get Started for Free

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex
28 cases
  • Hernandez v. Banks
    • United States
    • D.C. Court of Appeals
    • May 2, 2013
    ...Co., 137 Mich. 309, 100 N.W. 569, 571–72 (1904); Schultz v. Oldenburg, 202 Minn. 237, 277 N.W. 918, 921 (1938); Jamison v. Culligan, 151 Mo. 410, 52 S.W. 224, 225 (1899); Sawtelle v. Tatone, 105 N.H. 398, 201 A.2d 111, 115 (1964); Robinson v. Kind, 25 Nev. 261, 62 P. 705, 705 (1900); Blinn ......
  • State ex rel. United Mut. Ins. Ass'n v. Shain
    • United States
    • Missouri Supreme Court
    • April 16, 1942
    ...the United Commercial Travelers of America v. Shain, 339 Mo. 903, 98 S.W.2d 597; McKenzie v. Donnell, 151 Mo. 461, 52 S.W. 222; Jamison v. Culligan, 151 Mo. 410; Wells v. Mutual Benefit Assn., 126 Mo. Wiggington v. Burns, 216 S.W. 756. (2) In holding that the giving of relator's Instruction......
  • Byers v. Security Beneficiary Soc. of Topeka, Kan.
    • United States
    • Kansas Court of Appeals
    • January 6, 1941
    ...consideration and without knowledge of insanity, it shall not be set aside. Doty v. Mumma, 305 Mo. 188, 264 S.W. 656; Jamison v. Culligan, 151 Mo. 410, 52 S.W. 224. (b) Plaintiff made no offer or attempt to place the in status quo, a condition precedent to setting aside a contract. Wells v.......
  • Smith v. Wallace
    • United States
    • Missouri Supreme Court
    • September 17, 1938
    ... ... jury and the judgment rendered thereon cannot stand ... Hoffman v. Bigham, 24 S.W.2d 132; Jamison v ... Culligan, 151 Mo. 410. (4) The court erred in failing ... and refusing to give appellants' instructions in the ... nature of a demurrer to ... ...
  • Get Started for Free