Jones v. Geery

• Decision Date: 23 January 1900
• Citation: 153 Mo. 476,55 S.W. 73
• Parties: JONES v. GEERY et al.
• Court: Missouri Supreme Court

55 S.W. 73

153 Mo. 476

JONES v. GEERY et al.

Supreme Court of Missouri, Division No. 2.

January 23, 1900.

FRAUDULENT CONVEYANCE.

Where a father conveyed a farm valued at from $3,000 to $4,000 to his sons, in consideration of their assuming an indebtedness of the father's of $2,300, and undertaking to support and care for him, there is no evidence of a voluntary conveyance.

Appeal from circuit court, Pike county; Reuben F. Roy, Judge.

Bill by John B. Jones against Andrew Geery and Robert Geery, Jr. From a decree dismissing the bill, plaintiff appeals. Affirmed.

This is an appeal from a decree of the circuit court of Pike county dismissing a bill in equity to set aside a deed from Robert Geery, Sr., to Robert Geery, Jr., and Andrew Geery, to certain lands in Pike county. The cause has been certified to this court because the title to real estate is involved. The farm involved is variously estimated to be worth from $3,000 to $4,000. Robert Geery, the grantor, was an old man, — in his 85th year. When an old man and a widower, he married a second time, and conveyed his farm to his second wife and her children. They afterwards separated, and he brought suit to set aside his deed; and that action resulted in setting aside the deed, but giving the wife judgment for $1,300. Attorney's fees and other charges swelled the total of the old gentleman's indebtedness to about $2,300. At the solicitation of the old man's counsel, his two sons, Andrew and Robert, Jr., were induced to assume his indebtedness, and undertake to provide for his support the remainder of his life; and upon these terms he conveyed the land to them. They borrowed enough on the land to liquidate his debts above mentioned, and paid them. Thereafter the plaintiff, who is a son-in-law, brought suit against the old man, and recovered judgment for $250, for board alleged to have been furnished the old man, and now seeks to have the deed set aside as voluntary, and the farm subjected to the payment of said judgment for board. The circuit court found for defendants, and plaintiff appeals.

J. D. Hostetter, J. B. Jones, and Sam G. Pollard, for appellant. Fagg & Ball, for respondents.

GANTT, P. J. (after stating the facts).

There is no pretense whatever that the conveyance was the result of any actual fraud. Indeed, it appears that it was executed with the knowledge of plaintiff, and, if not with his full consent, certainly without any objection at the time. Nor is the claim made that it was a...