Morgan v. Wright

Decision Date08 March 1965
Docket NumberNo. 20571,20571
Citation399 P.2d 788,156 Colo. 411
PartiesLura MORGAN, Ruby Salmon, Bernice Clark, Clarence Wood, and Owen Wood, Plaintiffs in Error, v. Clara Lee WRIGHT and Robert C. Wright, Defendants in Error.
CourtColorado Supreme Court

Harold D. Lutz, Arvada, for plaintiffs in error.

George H. Lerg and Alex Stephen Keller, Denver, for defendants in error.

SUTTON, Justice.

This is an action primarily designed to impress a trust on certain real estate, title to which is held by defendants in error, who are husband and wife. Plaintiffs in error were also plaintiffs in the trial court and will be referred to as plaintiffs or by name.

The record discloses that Emma Wright, mother of defendant Clara Lee Wright and mother or stepmother, as the case may be, to the various plaintiffs, owned 320 acres of grazing land in Logan County, Colorado. On December 31, 1937 Emma, apparently without the request of and admittedly out of the presence of Clara Lee, conveyed the land in question outright to Clara Lee with the knowledge of at least two of the plaintiffs. At that time, and often thereafter, the mother lived in the home of or in a small cottage close by Clara Lee's home in the Denver area. Prior to conveying the land to Clara Lee, the mother had proposed to convey it to her son Clarence Wood who declined the offer.

The record discloses that Clara Lee alone paid the taxes on the property after 1937, and she alone looked after it. On January 20, 1951 she leased the land for oil and gas exploration and received $1,600.00 including the bonus payment. Emma Wright died on August 1, 1952, and on February 18, 1953 Clara Lee conveyed the lands to hereself and to her husband in joint tenancy.

The cash payment received in 1951 was divided by Clara Lee with the plaintiffs. She sent or gave each one a check as follows, viz.: To Ruby she gave $405.00 with a notation on the check that read '1/6 of oil lease plus $140,00 Owen owed'; to Lura she gave $265.00 noting '1/6 of Oil Lease'; to Clarence $265.00 noting '1/6 of oil lease'; to Bernice $215.00 noting '1/6 of Oil Lease less $50.00 owe me'; and to Owen $125.00 noting '1/6 of oil lease less $140.00 owed to Ruby.'

Though Clara Lee continued to receive both grazing rentals and an annual oil and gas lease rental of $320.00 after 1951, as well as later gas royalty checks, she made only one other distribution to plaintiffs, that was in 1956 when she sent each one a check for $42.65. That time Ruby's, Clarence's and Owen's checks bore a notation of '1/6 of Oil Lease (tax paid)' and Lura's and Bernice's said '1/6 of oil lease.'

The evidence is that when one of the plaintiffs discovered that there was a gas well on the property in 1959, she consulted with the other plaintiffs and, evidently without making any demand on Clara Lee of any kind, filed suit on April 18, 1960, seeking to impress a trust on the property for their benefit; also they sought conveyances of their alleged interests, and demanded an accounting. The answer denied the material allegations of the complaint and claimed laches as well as that the claims were barred by various statutes of limitation.

At the trial, Clara Lee was called as an adverse witness and testified as follows: that she owned the land outright; had paid income taxes through the years on all income received therefrom; had paid all property taxes and expenses; and that the distributions made by her were only gifts to her brothers and sisters and were to repay each of them certain sums they had loaned or given to their mother to help her pay off a farm mortgage in Missouri. It appears that the Missouri farm had later been traded by the mother for the Logan County land. Three of the other children and one disinterested witness also testified--some of which testimony was blatant hearsay and some of which contradicted Clara Lee's claim of sole ownership. Her testimony about the original Missouri mortgage pay-off and her...

To continue reading

Request your trial
13 cases
  • Bishop and Diocese of Colorado v. Mote, 83SC104
    • United States
    • Colorado Supreme Court
    • 13 Enero 1986
    ...unequivocal and unambiguous language or conduct" establishing the intent to create a trust is required, Morgan v. Wright, 156 Colo. 411, 415, 399 P.2d 788, 790-91 (1965) (quoting 89 C.J.S., Trusts, § 45); see also Matter of Estate of Daniels, 665 P.2d 594 at 595 (Colo.1983); Fleming & Pattr......
  • Pino v. Jensen (In re Jensen)
    • United States
    • U.S. Bankruptcy Appellate Panel, Tenth Circuit
    • 7 Junio 2019
    ...at 1371. 76. Pacini v. Ennis (In re Ennis), No. 10-01458, 2012 WL 3727324, at *5 (10th Cir. BAP Aug. 29, 2012) (citing Morgan v. Wright, 399 P.2d 788, 790-91 (Colo. 1965)). 77. Appellants' Br. 28. 78. Despite the fact that the Pinos cited to no applicable state statute that might give rise ......
  • Fickes v. Fickes (In re Fickes)
    • United States
    • U.S. Bankruptcy Court — District of Colorado
    • 30 Septiembre 2011
    ...the Plaintiff's brokerage and bank accounts as property over which Mark Fickes acted as a fiduciary for the Plaintiff. Morgan v. Wright, 156 Colo. 411, 415 (Colo. 1965). Likewise, in the Tenth Circuit, in order to establish that a fiduciary relationship existed, "the court must find that th......
  • Trans-West, Inc. v. Mullins (In re Mullins)
    • United States
    • U.S. Bankruptcy Court — District of Colorado
    • 30 Septiembre 2020
    ...or technical trust. Id. Under Colorado law, creation of an express trust requires unequivocal and unambiguous language. Morgan v Wright, 156 Colo. 411, 415 (1965) (citation omitted). Here, although Mullins owed a fiduciary duty as an employee to Trans-West, there was no express trust leadin......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
1 books & journal articles
  • Chapter 8 - § 8.7 • TRUSTS
    • United States
    • Colorado Bar Association Colorado Real Property Law (CBA) Chapter 8 Estates In Real Property
    • Invalid date
    ...Nat'l Trust & Sav. Ass'n v. Scully, 92 F.2d 97 (10th Cir. 1937).[267] Estate of Brenner, 547 P.2d 938 (Colo. 1976).[268] Morgan v. Wright, 399 P.2d 788 (Colo. 1965); Goemmer v. Hartman, 791 P.2d 1238 (Colo. App. 1990).[269] C.R.S. § 38-10-106; Farrand v. Beshoar, 12 P. 196 (Colo. 1886); Arm......

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