McMahon v. McMahon, 42126
| Decision Date | 12 February 1962 |
| Docket Number | No. 42126,42126 |
| Citation | 137 So.2d 520,243 Miss. 89 |
| Parties | Mrs. Lydia Schloesser McMAHON v. W. A. McMAHON. |
| Court | Mississippi Supreme Court |
Joe G. Moss, Raymond, T. Eugene Caldwell, Jackson, for appellant.
Wells, Thomas & Wells, Roland D. Marble, Jackson, for appellee.
This case is before us on appeal by Mrs. Lydia Schloesser McMahon, complainant in the court below, from a decree of the Chancery Court of the First Judicial District of Hinds County, sustaining a demurrer to the bill of complaint filed by the complainant against W. A. McMahon, defendant in the court below, seeking to establish the complainant's title to an undivided one-fourth interest in a 160-acre tract of land situated in the First Judicial District of said county, less and except a a portion of said 160-acre tract, containing approximately 75 acres, sold and conveyed by the defendant to the Mississippi State Highway Commission, and seeking to recover a money judgment against the defendant for an amount equal to a one-fourth part of the purchase price paid to the defendant for the 75 acres sold and conveyed to the State Highway Commission, and seeking to establish a lien on the remainder of said 160-acre tract to secure the payment of said money judgment.
The bill of complaint was filed by the complainant on March 10, 1961.
The complainant alleged in her bill of complaint that she had acquired title to an undivided one-fourth interest in the above mentioned 160-acre tract of land as devisee under the will of her late husband, James Hutson McMahon, also referred to in the record as 'J. H. McMahon', who died testate on February 19, 1942, while living with the complainant at Frenier, Louisiana, in St. John the Baptist Parish; that said land had been conveyed to Mrs. Malissa McMahon, the defendant's mother, and her four children, J. H. McMahon, W. A. McMahon, N. G. McMahon, and Mrs. Lucille McMahon by W. B. Taylor by special warranty deed dated January 27, 1904; that the defendant W. A. McMahon resided on said land with his mother, Mrs. Malissa McMahon, until her death in 1929, when title to said land became vested in the four children as tenants-in-common each owning an undivided one-fourth interest therein; and that the defendant continued to reside on the property after his mother's death. The complainant further alleged that a few weeks after the death of her husband in 1942, she received a letter from her brother-in-law, Neil G. McMahon, stating that the defendant wished to talk with her, and that the defendant would let her have some money, if she were in need of money; that the defendant thereafter devised means to have the complainant come to Jackson, Mississippi; and that, on August 12, 1944, the complainant received a letter from an attorney representing the defendant requesting certain papers and information in connection with the succession of the James Hutson McMahon Estate in Louisiana. The complainant further alleged that, pursuant to the request of the defendant and the defendant's attorney, the complainant came to Jackson and went directly to the office of the defendant's attorney, where she was confronted by the defendant and said attorney and was told that she had not made any reports in Mississippi, where she owned property, that she was trying to beat the government out of taxes, and that unless she immediately started administration proceedings she would be put in jail. The complainant further alleged that she was placed in a state of shock and was in great fear, and because of the fiduciary relationship existing between her and her brother-in-law and the above mentioned attorney, she agreed to carry out their wishes by filing a copy of the last will of her deceased husband and petitioning for letters of executorship in the Chancery Court of Hinds County, and that, in the course of said administration, she was required to sign numerous petitions, affidavits, notices and other papers, not having an opportunity to read such papers or to know what was in such papers, but being advised by the defendant and said attorney that all was a formality, and that they were doing her a favor in keeping her out of trouble. The complainant further alleged that after her husband's death she suffered a broken hip and a stroke, and developed pneumonia; that she was hospitalized in the City of New Orleans and in the City of Hammond, Louisiana; and that since that time her health had been such that it was necessary that she be cared for by registered nurses and by practical nurses; that she became despondent and suffered a loss of memory, and for many years was unable to attend to her affairs.
The complainant further alleged that sometime during the month of March 1959 she came to Jackson with a practical nurse who was caring for her, and while in Jackson on that trip she stated to an attorney that she was a part owner of some property near the City of Jackson, at a place called Van Winkle, and she asked the attorney to examine the records in the courthouse and find out how many acres she owned; that the attorney examined the records and discovered that the defendant had executed a deed conveying approximately 75 acres of the above mentioned 160-acre tract of land in which the complainant owned an undivided one-fourth interest to the State Highway Commission for a consideration of $136,000, and that the attorney in examining said records also found a recorded quitclaim deed dated October 10, 1944, purportedly signed by the complainant, conveying to the defendant all her right, title and interest in said 160-acre tract of land, copies of each of said deeds being attached as exhibits to the bill of complaint. The complainant further alleged that she had not signed said quitclaim deed, and that said deed was void; that said deed was without consideration; and that the complainant was not in the State of Mississippi on the date said deed appeared to have been signed and acknowledged.
The complainant further alleged 'that said purported quitclaim deed was not signed by complainant, but that if said instrument does bear her true signature, the same was obtained by fraud and duress on the part of defendant; * * * that a fiduciary relationship existed between complainant and defendant, her brother-in-law, * * * and that her affairs in Mississippi were in his own personal and peculiar knowledge; that * * * complainant did not have knowledge of all of the facts; that she was, of necessity, required to rely on his judgment and statements, and that in securing the quitclaim deed, if in truth and in fact the same was executed by complainant, which she denies, it was done so at a time when complainant was required by defendant and his attorney to execute many instruments which she believed to be in connection with her late husband's estate.'
The complainant further alleged that she...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
McMahon v. McMahon, 42792
...The court sustained the demurrer and dismissed appellant's bill of complaint. This appeal was reversed and remanded in McMahon v. McMahon, 243 Miss. 89, 137 So.2d 520. The allegations of the bill of complaint are well stated in this When the bill of complaint was remanded the court allowed ......
-
Hamilton v. McGill, 49510
...difference. The Court ultimately held it was immaterial that status quo could not be literally restored. Moreover, in McMahon v. McMahon, 243 Miss. 89, 137 So.2d 520 (1962), this Court gave application to that which is stated in Griffith, Mississippi Chancery Practice, as . . . "In accordan......
-
Cooley v. Cooley, 48537
...not yet reported. We adhere to the rule of Neal, supra, and its subsequent repronouncements and distinguish it from McMahon v. McMahon, 243 Miss. 89, 137 So.2d 520 (1962), upon the basis of judicial discretion. McMahon states in '. . . If the demurrer raise merely a doubtful question or if ......