Laibly v. Halseth
| Decision Date | 10 November 1959 |
| Docket Number | No. 2868,2868 |
| Citation | 345 P.2d 796 |
| Parties | Walla E. LAIBLY, Appellant (Plaintiff below), v. Anne HALSETH and Elmer Halseth, Appellees (Defendants below). |
| Court | Wyoming Supreme Court |
Frank R. Schofield, Green River, for appellant.
Edwin V. Magagna, Rock Springs, for appellees.
Before BLUME, C. J., and PARKER and HARNSBERGER, JJ.
A widow brought this action against her sister-in-law and her sister-in-law's husband, seeking to set aside an assignment which the widow made shortly after the death of her husband. The instrument assigned an undivided one-half interest in the estate of the deceased to his sister, Anne Halseth, one of the defendants. On trial to the court, judgment was rendered in favor of defendants and the plaintiff appeals.
As far as the record shows, the plaintiff was the sole heir of the deceased, and as she was appointed administratrix of his estate he evidently died intestate. Thus, she would have been entitled to inherit the whole of the estate after payment of its debts, claims and expenses.
The deceased left certain real estate holdings in Minnesota and other property in Rock Springs, Wyoming, a principal portion of which was what is referred to as the Miner's Home Bar. Following the death of the deceased, the plaintiff, who was in Nebraska when her husband suffered the injuries which took his life, came to Rock Springs and conferred with the defendant Elmer Halseth about the management of the bar and the Wyoming administration of her husband's estate. During these conferences she told Elmer Halseth she wanted to transfer to his wife Anne Halseth, the sister of the deceased, an undivided one-half interest in her late husband's estate in fulfillment of what plaintiff said was the deceased's wish and desire. At the time, the plaintiff's funds were somewhat meager and she sought to borrow $1,400 from defendant Elmer Halseth, who was unable to make the loan in that large an amount. The plaintiff then went to her Rock Springs attorney and there, in company with Elmer Halseth and the attorney for appellees, discussed the proposed transfer of a portion of the plaintiff's interest in the estate of the deceased. Thereafter, plaintiff, Elmer Halseth, and appellees' attorney went to the latter's office where the disputed instrument was prepared and executed by the plaintiff. It is as follows:
'In the Matter of the Estate of William A. Laibly, deceased.}
'Assignment of Interest
'Know All Men By These Presents; That I, the undersigned, in order to carry out the wishes and intentions of said William A. Laibly, and in consideration of love and affection for Anne Halseth, sister of said William A. Laibly, and in further consideration of Elmer Halseth advancing and loaning the sum of $650.00 to me, and in consideration of the sum of $100.00, the receipt whereof is hereby acknowledged, do by these presents, give, grant, bargain, sell, assign, transfer, and set over unto Anne Halseth, sister of said William A. Laibly an undivided one-half interest to, in, and of the estate of William A. Laibly, deceased, and I do hereby authorize the court to make distribution to said undivided one-half interest of all the property of said estate, to said Anne Halseth.
'To have and to hold the same unto the said Anne Halseth, her heirs, executors, administrators and assigns forever.
'Dated this 6th day of June, 1955.
'/s/ Mrs. Walla E. Laibly
'The State of Wyoming County of Sweetwater} SS.
'I, Edwin V. Magagna, a Notary Public in and for said County, in the State aforesaid, do hereby certify that said Mrs. Walla E. Laibly personally known to me as the person whose name is subscribed to the annexed instrument appeared before me this day in person and acknowledged that she signed, sealed and delivered said instrument of writing as her free and voluntary act, for the uses and purposes therein set forth.
'Given under my hand and seal this 6th day of June, 1955.
'My Commission expires November 7, 1956.
'(Seal)
'/s/ Edwin V. Magagna
Notary Public.'
Later, plaintiff returned to Nebraska and wrote several letters to defendants, making reference to the business affairs of the estate in Wyoming and to properties in Minnesota.
Evidence most favorable to defendants shows that the relationship between plaintiff and defendants, following the death of the deceased on May 21, 1955, and until this suit was filed on June 12, 1957, was friendly as evidenced by letters from plaintiff to defendants; that when plaintiff requested defendant Elmer Halseth, who was a school teacher, to lend her $1,400, he explained he did not have that much money but he would lend her $650 and make her an outright gift of $100. This he did, taking from plaintiff her promissory note in the sum of $650. Plaintiff then left Rock Springs and for some time continued to correspond with defendants in a friendly manner concerning the handling of the estate's properties in which both she and Anne Halseth were then interested. However, after the lapse of two years, plaintiff brought this action to set aside the assignment she had made to Anne Halseth.
In her pleadings, plaintiff claimed that the assignment was given as security for a loan; that the assignment was void for lack of consideration; and that the assignment should be set aside on the ground the consideration therefor, if any given, was so inadequate as to shock the conscience of the court and was unconscionable.
Appellant now asserts there was error in the court's concluding:
1. The assignment was not given as security for the $650 loan.
2. The assignment was not void because there was no consideration.
3. The assignment should not be set aside because the inadequacy of consideration shocks the conscience.
There is an entire absence of evidence that the assignment was given as security for the $650 loan to the plaintiff. The testimony is that because of plaintiff's need and her in-law relationship to his wife, defendant Elmer Halseth loaned her $650 without taking any security whatsoever, receiving only her promissory note evidencing the debt. Appellant's first contention is, therefore, overruled.
Although the $650 was only a loan, the inducement for its making was plaintiff's agreement to make the assignment at least it so appears from the assignment itself.
Conversely, the inducement to make the assignment was obtaining the $650 loan. Plaintiff admits $650 was paid to and received by her, so the consideration for the assignment was given and accepted.
In the rehearing of Hamilton v. Diefenderfer, 21 Wyo. 266, 274, 277, 133 P. 1081, 1082; Id., 20 Wyo. 138, 122 P. 88; 21 Wyo. 266, 131 P. 37, this court commented:
'* * * Though the price be inadequate, and that fact may be...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Roussalis v. Wyoming Medical Center, Inc.
...for consideration, one of them recognized by this Court is "a benefit to the promisor or a detriment to the promisee." Laibly v. Halseth, 345 P.2d 796, 799 (Wyo.1959); Moorcroft State Bank v. Morel, 701 P.2d 1159, 1162 We are inclined to agree with the doctors' argument. With respect to the......
-
Mobil Coal Producing, Inc. v. Parks
...408 Mich. 579, 292 N.W.2d 880, 892 (1980). Benefit to the promisor is sufficient consideration for a contract. Laibly v. Halseth, Wyo., 345 P.2d 796, 799 (1959); Houghton v. Thompson, 57 Wyo. 196, 115 P.2d 654, 658 (1941). Other jurisdictions have recognized that an employer's personnel man......
-
Tate v. Mountain States Tel. and Tel. Co.
...Board of Commissioners of Natrona County v. Casper National Bank, 56 Wyo. 132, 105 P.2d 578, 130 A.L.R. 727 (1940); and Laibly v. Halseth, Wyo., 345 P.2d 796 (1959). The contract is valid, but paragraph G.5 of appellee's General Exchange Tariff limiting liability to gross negligence or will......
-
Frederick's Estate, Matter of
...that a contract was unconscionable for inadequacy of consideration simply because one of the parties was disappointed. Laibly v. Halseth, Wyo., 345 P.2d 796 (1959). We therefore hold that this lease and the option to purchase could not, as a matter of law, be found unconscionable as the pro......