Marron v. Lynch

Decision Date22 November 1932
Docket Number41469
Citation245 N.W. 346,215 Iowa 341
PartiesH. E. MARRON, Administrator, Appellee, v. TOMIE LYNCH, Appellant
CourtIowa Supreme Court

Appeal from Fayette District Court.--W. L. EICHENDORF, Judge.

Action upon a promissory note. An affirmative defense was pleaded to the effect that the note had been cancelled by agreement between the maker and the payee; that such agreement was entered into as a compromise of a bona-fide controversy between the parties on other matters. At the close of the evidence the trial court sustained the plaintiff's motion for a directed verdict and entered judgment accordingly. The defendant has appealed.

Affirmed.

Condon & White, for appellant.

W. H Antes and M. E. Geiser, for appellee.

EVANS J. STEVENS, C. J., and KINDIG, BLISS, and CLAUSSEN, JJ concur.

OPINION

EVANS, J.

The plaintiff is the administrator of Thomas Lynch, Sr., who died May 10, 1928. The alleged agreement of compromise set up by the defendant was entered into, if at all, on or about November 1, 1927. The pleading of the defendant is that on or about the year 1903, when he was about to attain his majority, his father asked him to stay at home upon the farm for six or seven years, and that in consideration of his doing so, the father would give him 80 acres of land; that the defendant did stay at home and continued to work up to and including the year 1910; that about that time he was married and took up farming for himself; that in 1926 the father conveyed to the defendant forty acres of land, and no more; that the alleged compromise of November, 1927, was predicated upon the failure of the father to convey to the defendant the full acreage contracted for. The note was for $ 2,000, dated June 2, 1916, and drawn to become due on June 2, 1921, with 5% interest.

The plaintiff in reply pleaded the statute of limitations as against any purported obligation of the father to convey to the defendant an additional 40 acres of land. The question presented upon the pleadings is: Not whether the defendant had a valid cause of action against his father for failure to convey the land, but whether in November, 1927, there was a bona-fide controversy between the parties; whether the defendant was in good faith asserting a claim against his father; and whether as a compromise or settlement of such controversy the father agreed to cancel the note in suit. Partello v. White, 197 Iowa 24, 196 N.W. 719; Abell v. Partello, 202 Iowa 1236, 211 N.W. 868 (1244). If there was a bona-fide controversy, and if there was an agreement of compromise of such controversy, the relative merits of the respective contentions of the parties will not be inquired into in order to determine the validity of the compromise agreement. The plaintiff's plea of the statute of limitations as against the contract of 1903 to 1910 avails nothing. It follows from the foregoing that the burden was on the defendant to prove the compromise pleaded. It is not sufficient that he prove a mere promise by his father in November, 1927, to cancel the note. He must also prove that a dispute or controversy was compromised. Otherwise the alleged promise was without consideration. The evidence is brief, and consists of the testimony of the defendant's wife and his daughter, each of whom heard the conversation between the defendant and his father in November, 1927. Mrs. Lynch testified as follows:

"Well, Mr. Lynch said: 'I wanted to give you 80 acres. I have given you 40 and my wife won't sign the deed and will you be satisfied to take this $ 2000 note instead of the other 40 acres?' Tomie said, 'You can use the money and I can use the land.' And he said, Mr. Lynch said, that, 'Well, she won't sign the deed,' and Tomie said, 'Well, if that is satisfactory to you I will settle that way.' Mr. Lynch said, 'I will try her once more and if she doesn't sign the deed I will cancel the note and it will never bother you again.' And Tomie said, 'That will be all right with me.'"

The defendant's daughter, Margaret, testified as follows:

"My grandfather said that he was to give my father 80 acres of land for staying at home and working after he was of age. He had already given him 40...

To continue reading

Request your trial

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT