Keplinger v. Ward
| Decision Date | 28 March 1946 |
| Docket Number | No. 17436.,17436. |
| Citation | 116 Ind.App. 517,65 N.E.2d 644 |
| Parties | KEPLINGER v. WARD et al. |
| Court | Indiana Appellate Court |
OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE
Appeal from St. Joseph Superior Court, No. 2; J. Elmer Peak, Judge.
Action by Mabel Ward Keplinger against George A. Ward, and others, to set aside certain deeds made by Albert H. Ward on the ground of undue influence and unsoundness of mind. Judgment for defendants, and plaintiff appeals.
Affirmed.
See, also, 64 N.E.2d 307.
Allen & Allen, for South Ben, for appellant.
Lewis W. Hammond, of South Bend, for appellees.
This action was brought by appellant to set aside certain deeds made by one Albert H. Ward on the grounds of undue influence and unsoundness of mind. The trial court sustained a motion for judgment for appellees at the close of appellant's evidence and the correctness of this ruling is the sole question presented on appeal.
We have examined the record with care and we are unable to discover any evidence of either undue influence or unsoundness of mind.
The test of the capacity to make a deed is that the grantor shall have sufficient mind and memory to comprehend the nature and extent of his act and to understand the nature of the business in which he is engaged, and to exercise his own will with reference thereto. Deckard v. Kleindorfer, 1940, 108 Ind.App. 485, 29 N.E.2d 997.
There is no evidence of such incapacity. Several lay witnesses testified that in their opinion the grantor herein was of unsound mind. But the opinion of nonexpert witnesses that a person is of unsound mind can have no greater weight than the facts upon which such opinion is based. Daugherty v. Daugherty, 1945, 115 Ind.App. 253, 57 N.E.2d 599.
In the instant case these opinions were based upon such unsubstantial facts as that the grantor talked loudly and cursed about politics, money matters and his family, that he was unkempt and dirty, that he said upon occasions that he had become lost, and that he occasionally rambled in his conversations from one subject to another.
The grantor was 83 years of age, had dropsy and was suffering from some of the infirmities of old age. But a person is not incapacitated to make and execute a deed merely because of advanced years or by reason of physical infirmities unless such age and the infirmities resulting therefrom impair such person's mental faculties until he is unable to properly, intelligently and fairly protect and preserve his property rights. Deckard v....
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Baker v. McCague
... ... conveyance here questioned she was unable to comprehend the ... act in which she was engaged. Daugherty v. Daughtery, supra; ... Keplinger v. Ward et al., Ind.App., 1946, 65 N.E.2d ... [75 N.E.2d 64.] ... We cannot agree with appellants that because the deed ... attempted to create ... ...
-
Bowden v. Elston Bank & Trust Co. of Crawfordsville, 17656.
...infirmities. Daugherty v. Daugherty, 1945, 115 Ind.App. 253, 57 N.E.2d 599;Keplinger v. Ward, 1946, 116 Ind.App. 517, 64 N.E.2d 307,65 N.E.2d 644;Baker v. McCague, Ind.App., 1947, 75 N.E.2d 61. The decision of the trial court was justified by the evidence. Judgment ...
-
Lamb v. Conder
...other case provided by these rules or by statute.'2 Buuck v. Kruckeberg (1950), 121 Ind.App. 262, 95 N.E.2d 304; Keplinger v. Ward (1946), 116 Ind.App. 517, 65 N.E.2d 644; Deckard v. Kleindorfer (1940), 108 Ind.App. 485, 29 N.E.2d ...
-
Hinshaw v. Hinshaw
...Daugherty [et al.], 1945, 115 Ind.App. 253, 267, 57 N.E.2d 599; Keplinger v. Ward [et al.], 1946, 116 Ind.App. 517, 520, 64 N.E.2d 307, 65 N.E.2d 644; Wiley et al. v. Gordon [et al.], 1914, 181 Ind. 252, 104 N.E. 500; Rarick et al v. Ulmer [by Next Friend], 1895, 144 Ind. 25, 42 N.E. 1099. ......