Jenkins v. Meyer
| Decision Date | 13 July 1964 |
| Docket Number | No. 50218,No. 1,50218,1 |
| Citation | 380 S.W.2d 315 |
| Parties | Alice N. JENKINS and Drucilla B. Henderson, Appellants, v. Randall W. MEYER, Executor of the Estate of Amanda Berndt, Deceased, the Kemper State Bank of Boonville, Missouri, and the Evangelical Church of Boonville, Missouri, Respondents |
| Court | Missouri Supreme Court |
Orr, Sapp & Woods, Edwin C. Orr, Guy V. Head, Columbia, for appellants.
L. O. Schaumburg, Boonville, for respondent, Evangelical Church of Boonville.
John J. Stegner, Boonville, for respondent, Randall W. Meyer, as such Executor.
HOUSER, Commissioner.
Suit in equity by Alice N. Jenkins and Drucilla B. Henderson against Randall W. Meyer, Executor of the Estate of Amanda Berndt, Deceased, et al., to trace funds and impress a trust upon the proceeds of five certificates issued by a building and loan association and two banks. In two of the certificates Amanda or Drucilla were named as payees and in three of them Amanda or Alice were so named. Each plaintiff, claiming separately and independently of the other, sought to establish that she was a joint tenant with the right of survivorship as to the certificates in which she was named, entitled as such to the entire proceeds as the surviving joint tenant upon the death of the cotenant, Amanda Berndt. After an extended trial the chancellor found against plaintiffs on their theory of recovery and plaintiffs have appealed from the judgment rendered against them. We have jurisdiction because the total amount of the certificates in question, including interest to the date of judgment, exceeds the sum of $15,000. Berry v. Crouse, Mo.App., 370 S.W.2d 724, and case cited.
Amanda Berndt, spinster and seamstress, lived in a large house in Boonville, took in transient roomers, and by hard work, thrift and frugality accumulated nearly thirty-four thousand dollars. Randall W. Meyer was her business adviser. For many years Drucilla B. Henderson and her daughter, Alice N. Jenkins, for brevity's safe referred to as Drucilla and Alice, were friends and neighbors of Amanda. Drucilla and Alice operated a nursing home in Boonville. In July, 1959 Amanda, then nearly 85 years of age, in failing health, sold her home and on August 7, 1959 moved into the nursing home, paying Drucilla and Alice $5,000 to care for and keep her for the rest of her life. In January, 1961 Amanda was adjudged a person of unsound mind and Mr. Meyer was appointed her guardian. Among her assets were numerous building and loan certificates and bank certificates of deposit payable to Amanda and various other persons. Acting under the order of the probate court the guardian had these certificates canceled and reissued in the name of his ward, Amanda Berndt, in form payable to her alone. Amanda died November 24, 1961 at the age of 87 years, leaving no known surviving relatives. Mr. Meyer was appointed executor of her estate.
Drucilla and Alice brought this suit against the executor, each seeking recovery on the following instruments in which one or the other of them had been named as a payee prior to the order of the probate court:
Exhibit No. Date Issued by Payable to
----------- --------- ----------------- ----- --------------------------
3 7-14-1959 The Boonville 5,000 Amanda Berndt or
Building and Loan Drucilla B. Henderson
Association or survivor
4 7-15-1959 The Boonville 1,000 Amanda Berndt-or-Alice
Building and Loan Jenkins-or-survivor
Association
8 9-12-1960 National Bank 5,000 Amanda Berndt or Mrs
Bonnville Alice N. Jenkins
11 11-9-1960 Kemper State Bank 3,900 Amanda Berndt or Alice
Jenkins, or either one of
them, as joint tenants
with right of survivorship
and not as tenants
in common
12 11-9-1960 Kemper State Bank 3,900 Amanda Berndt or Drucilla
B. Henderson, or
either one of them, as
joint tenants with right
of survivorship and not
as tenants in common
The Evangelical Church, sole legatee and distributee under the last will and testament of Amanda, was made a party defendant, along with the executor and the financial institutions involved.
Plaintiffs called defendant Mr. Meyer to the stand, and put him on as their witness. He testified to the following facts: He attended to Amanda's business during the latter years of her life--from the early 1950's--investing her money at her direction, as her business agent. From July 15, 1959 he acted under a power of attorney executed by Amanda. At the beginning, when Mr. Meyer first started looking after Amanda's affairs, she instructed him that her money was to be invested She wanted to control her certificates as long as she lived. She did in fact receive the income and interest from all of the various investments made by Mr. Meyer for her, during her lifetime, no matter who else was named in the certificates as payee. All of the money invested by Mr. Meyer for Amanda was Amanda's own individual property; none of the funds invested in the certificates naming Drucilla or Alice were contributed by them. Amanda told Mr. Meyer that she wanted to give Drucilla and Alice some money; that she wanted Drucilla to have $5,000 at her death and wanted Alice to have $1,000 at her death. Acting upon Amanda's instructions, Mr. Meyer, secretary-treasurer of the association, caused the two building and loan investment certificates, Exhibits 3 and 4, to be issued. Later Amanda instructed Mr. Meyer to cause to be issued the two $3,900 bank certificates of deposit naming Drucilla in one and Alice in the other, Exhibits 11 and 12. Amanda also told Mr. Meyer that she wanted him to have $6,000 at her death and pursuant to her directions he had the association issue investment certificates totaling $6,000 payable to Amanda or Randall W. Meyer, Sr., or the survivor. With reference to all of Amanda's transactions with the building and loan association Mr. Meyer was instructed and given to understand that so long as she lived she was to have complete control over the deposits made in the building and loan association, and that she would expect to receive all the income therefrom. She did in fact receive all of the income from the building and loan investment certificates. The National Bank of Boonville certificate of deposit, Exhibit 8, was issued payable 'to Amanda Berndt or Mrs. Alice N. Jenkins.' Amanda had directed Mr. Meyer to have it made out in form payable 'to Amanda Berndt or Mrs. Alice N. Jenkins, or survivor.' It was her intention to have the words 'or survivor' added. Mr. Meyer so instructed the bank, and considered that it was so issued, but in fact and apparently by inadvertence of the bank clerk the words 'or survivor' were not put in the certificate.
Once or twice Amanda asked Mr. Meyer for a statement as to what money she had and where and how it was invested. Pursuant to this request he made a typewritten statement, Exhibit 13, showing the contents of her safety deposit box, including a savings account passbook balance, the amount of cash therein, and listing all of her certificates of deposit and investment certificates, with the name of the financial institution, the amount, and the persons to whom they were payable. This writing, delivered to Amanda, was introduced in evidence at the trial by appellants. It listed, among others, the National Bank of Boonville certificate for $5,000, and stated that it was payable 'to Amanda Berndt or Alice Jenkins or Survivor.' It showed a bank balance of $7,770 in her savings account and it was this cash that was used to purchase the two $3,900 certificates of deposit, Amanda having told Mr. Meyer that she would like to close out that account and put it in time deposits 'so that she would get the interest off of it.' Appellants, who did not testify because of the Dead Man's Statute, urge that appellants must be taken to have known that they were named in these various certificates; that Exhibit 13 must have been given to them by Amanda, because appellants produced Exhibit 13 at the trial and it was not found by the executor among Amanda's effects. We do not consider that these facts justify the suggested inference, and we find no substantial evidence that appellant had any knowledge, prior the Amanda's death, of the existence of the certificates in question or that they were named as copayees.
There is no showing that a confidential relationship existed between Amanda and appellants. Although Amanda lived in appellants' rest home from August, 1959 and was physically incapacitated there is nothing to show that appellants assisted, advised or interfered with or were consulted in connection with any of Amanda's business affairs, or that Amanda reposed trust and confidence in appellants' business judgment and integrity, or that appellants attempted to or did influence Amanda with reference to the issuance or the payees to be named in any of the certificates, or that appellants during Amanda's lifetime had in their possession any of the certificates, or attempted to exercise any control over the certificates or the funds represented thereby. It is conceded...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Melton v. Ensley
...rule was first recognized in this state by Commerce Trust Company v. Watts, supra, 231 S.W.2d 817. It has been written that Jenkins v. Meyer, supra, 380 S.W.2d 315, casts doubt on Watts, 4 but with equal vehemency it is penned this just isn't so. 5 Jenkins did not involve a deposit contract......
-
Nelson v. Hotchkiss
...by destroying the unity of interest, leaving Irma Nelson, Robert Nelson and the Hotchkisses as tenants in common. See Jenkins v. Meyer, 380 S.W.2d 315, 320 (Mo.1964). Mr. Nelson's conveyance of his interest to the Hotchkisses created in them a new tenancy by the entirety in the one-fourth i......
-
Herrick Motor Co. v. Fischer Oldsmobile Co.
...258 S.W.2d 607, 608(1). But, while 'or' may be sometimes so used as to mean 'and', it is disjunctive in its very nature (Jenkins v. Meyer, Mo., 380 S.W.2d 315, 321) and its ordinary use is as a disjunctive particle (State v. Combs, Mo., 273 S.W. 1037, 1039) that marks an alternative corresp......
-
Wantuck v. United Sav. & Loan Ass'n
...that a deposit made thereunder becomes the property of those named as joint tenants with the right of survivorship. Jenkins v. Meyer, Mo., 380 S.W.2d 315, l.c. 320(4). See also 326.470, V.A.M.S., as to Banks and Trust Companies. The letter used the conjunctive 'and' rather than the disjunct......