Johnson v. Heald

• Decision Date: 08 December 1870
• Citation: 33 Md. 352
• Parties: CHARLES R. JOHNSON and Charlotte M. Johnson, His Wife v. JOHN H. HEALD, Executor of James Frazier.
• Court: Maryland Court of Appeals

33 Md. 352

CHARLES R. JOHNSON and Charlotte M. Johnson, His Wife v. JOHN H. HEALD, Executor of James Frazier.

Court of Appeals of Maryland

December 8, 1870

Appeal from the Circuit Court of Baltimore City.

The bill of complaint in this case, filed on the 24th of September, 1866, by the appellee against the appellants, and Jas. M. Frazier and the Northern Central Railway Company alleged that James Frazier died on the 18th of July, 1866 having made a will on the 23rd of December, 1863, in manner and form to pass real estate, which was duly proven, and on which letters testamentary were granted to the complainant that said Frazier died in the eighty-fifth year of his age and although originally a man of much vigor of mind and body he had become, in the last year or two of his life, exceedingly infirm, and this condition of feebleness gradually so increased that, towards the last, he was quite incapable of intelligent transaction of business--his senses were greatly impaired, and his memory shared the decay of his physical faculties. That more than a year before his death, he had sunk into a state of hopeless imbecility, and lost all power of managing or taking care of his property, or of resisting any influence which those by whom he was immediately surrounded might choose to exercise.

That at his death, and for two and a half years previously, his household consisted of his son, James M. Frazier, and his wife, Elizabeth, and of his daughter, Charlotte M. Johnson, and her husband, Charles R. Johnson, a master mariner, but who, on his return from sea in the latter part of the year 1864, also lived with his wife, in the same house; and that upon the said son, James M., and the daughter, Charlotte, and her husband, the care of his person and the possession of a very large amount of property devolved.

That although the said son and daughter were already greatly benefitted by the bounty of their father, who, while in health, had manifested no intention to give them a preference over persons having an equal claim, they availed themselves of their position--Charlotte being impelled thereto by her husband--to appropriate to themselves large portions of their father's property, when he was incapable of making a valid disposition of the same; and in order more effectually to get possession of his estate, the son, less than a year before his father's death, and when he was incapable of making a valid deed or contract, induced him to execute a power of attorney to him, under which he got into his possession large sums of money and valuable effects--part whereof he took to his own use, and another part, in execution of a mutual scheme and confederacy between himself and his sister Charlotte and her husband, he transferred to them, or one of them, and that Charlotte and her husband, with the connivance of the son, appropriated other property of their father to a still greater extent.

The bill then particularly charged that the testator owned in his life-time registered bonds of the Northern Central Railway Company to the amount of $10,000, standing in his name, and unregistered bonds of 1885, of the same company, to the amount of $20,500; and treasury notes of the United States, commonly called seven-thirties, to the amount of $25,500; and that said registered bonds were by the son, James M. Frazier, by virtue of a pretended power of attorney from his father, ordered to be made payable to bearer, and were thus delivered to his sister and her husband, on the 6th of July 1866, only twelve days before the death of his father, who was then lying bed-ridden, helpless and utterly incompetent to comprehend any matters of important business--and that the other, Northern Central Railway coupon bonds, some time during the last illness of said testator, when he was too infirm to exercise care over his property, were wrongfully taken possession of by the said Charles and Charlotte and converted to their own use; and that the said seven-thirty notes of the United States were, about the same time, wrongfully taken possession of by the said James M. Frazier, and converted to his own use.

The bill further charged that the said James M. Frazier, in May, 1865, prevailed on his father, then incapable of making a valid deed or contract, to execute to him without consideration, conveyances of certain parcels of fee simple and leasehold property, situated in the City of Baltimore, severally improved by buildings; and that on or about the 26th of August, 1861, the said testator executed to his daughter, Charlotte, a deed of the dwelling-house where he resided at the date of the deed, and continued to reside until his death, and likewise a bill of sale of the furniture in said house, and that said conveyances were made to the said Charlotte by way of portion, to be taken into account pro tanto, in ascertaining and settling her share of his estate when the same should be distributed at his death.

The bill also charged that at the death of the testator, he was represented in blood by his two surviving children, James and Charlotte, the issue of his deceased son, Edward, and the several issue of his four deceased daughters by their respective surviving husbands, who were named as devisees in his will.

The bill further charged that the property so taken possession of by the said James and Charlotte, in the last years of his life and during the period of his mental incapacity, was largely in excess of the portions or shares of his estate to which they were entitled under his will.

The bill prayed discovery and an account, and the surrender of all the Railway bonds and United States Treasury notes as rightly forming part of the assets of the estate of the testator, that the house and furniture conveyed to the appellant, Charlotte, should be adjudged to belong to the estate of her father, and in the distribution thereof be treated pro tanto as a part of the share or portion devised to her, that the conveyances made to James M. Frazier should be annulled, and the property thereby conveyed and the proceeds thereof be treated as a part of the estate of James Frazier; the bill also prayed for writs of injunction, and the appointment of a receiver. Injunctions were granted as prayed, including an injunction against the Northern Central Railway Company to restrain it from recognizing the pretended transfer of the registered bonds.

The appellants answered under oath, denying that the testator had fallen into a state of hopeless mental imbecility for more than a year before his death, or that he was bed-ridden some time previous to that event; the answer stated that he was a man of a very strong will to which he required every member of his family to bend, and this quality adhered to him to the end of his life; that he was therefore not to be influenced by those around him to do anything which he did not desire to do, or did not approve of; but he formed his own purposes, especially in regard to all matters of business or property, and carried them out with resolute determination.

That his frame was powerful and vigorous, and his health remained good almost to the last; and so far from being bedridden, he came down stairs to dinner the day before his death; that he had a clear and vigorous mind, and a remarkable capacity for business, which was shown by his successful career, and up to the 8th of July, he was of sound mind and competent to execute contracts, and to manage his affairs, although by reason of bodily infirmity, he required an agent to attend to his collections and other matters of business; that the appellant, Charlotte, was the youngest child of her father, and for many years the only surviving daughter and the only child who always lived with him; and that he was always deeply attached to her; that she first lived in his family and he afterwards lived in her's. That in 1852, she was married to the appellant, Charles R. Johnson, who since the marriage had seldom been at home, and then for short intervals, being constantly employed as captain in the merchants' service, until about July, 1865, since when he had found employment on shore. The answer denied that the gift of the house and furniture was intended as an advancement to the appellant, Charlotte, and alleged that the house was originally built for her by her father, as he often declared at the time it was built, but that he did not intend to give it to her as long as her mother lived. That her mother died on the 8th of August, 1861, and some weeks afterwards her father presented her with deeds of the house and furniture, without any suggestion or request on her part; that from that time she and her husband had used the house and furniture as her own, and that her right and title thereto was fully known, not only to the complainant, but to every member and relative of the family.

The answer stated the circumstances of the gift of Railway bonds, as follows: That their amount was $30,500, coupon bonds, of which $10,000 were registered in the name of the testator, the 11th of March, 1857; that when he gave his daughter these bonds, he came to her chamber and handed them to her, telling her that they were coupon bonds of the company and that they were for herself; that she thanked her father for his generous gift; took them and put them into her trunk in her own room, and had had possession of them ever since; that said coupon bonds were subsequently, by the direction of her father and in his presence, placed in an envelope, on which there was the following endorsement:

"A present to Charlotte M. Johnson, from James Frazier, Coupons, July 10th, 1864."

That the words "from James Frazier" were in the handwriting of her father, and the rest in her handwriting that the gift of said bonds by her fa...