Nichols v. Sauls' Estate, 43001

• Decision Date: 08 June 1964
• Docket Number: No. 43001,43001
• Parties: Edna Sauls NICHOLS et al. v. ESTATE of Edward B. SAULS, Deceased, Mary E. Sauls, Administratrix.
• Court: Mississippi Supreme Court

Page 352

165 So.2d 352

250 Miss. 307

Edna Sauls NICHOLS et al. v. ESTATE of Edward B. SAULS, Deceased, Mary E. Sauls, Administratrix.

No. 43001.

Supreme Court of Mississippi.

June 8, 1964.

O. W. Phillips, B. D. Statham, Magnolia, for appellants.

Mounger & Mounger, Tylertown, for appellee.

PATTERSON, Justice.

This proceeding was begun by the appellants to be declared legitimate children of E. B. Sauls, Sr., who died intestate on March 12, 1959, while a resident citizen of Walthall County, Mississippi. His widow, Mrs. Mary E. Sauls, administratrix of his estate, and the children, or their descendants, of E. B. Sauls, Sr., and Mattie Dunn Sauls, his first wife, contest this petition.

E. B. Sauls, Sr., hereinafter referred to as Sauls, first married Mattie Dunn on December 18, 1894. To this union there were born five children. Sauls was divorced from Mattie Dunn Sauls on January 14, 1913, in Tangipahoa Parish, Louisiana. On February 13, 1913, he married Katie Quin in Pike County, Mississippi, with whom he lived in Tylertown, Mississippi, the greater portion of the time as husband and wife until the death of Katie Quin Sauls on November 21, 1951. There was no issue of this marriage. Sauls left about the year 1917 with Daisy Eunice Simmons McCaffey, hereinafter referred to as Daisy, a widow who worked in the commissary of Sauls at his sawmill in Morgantown, Mississippi. He returned two or three days thereafter, but continued to intermittently live with Daisy down through the years.

The first place of residence of Sauls and Daisy does not appear in the record. The evidence reflects, however, that Edna Sauls, the oldest child of Daisy and Sauls, was born in New Orleans, Louisiana, on November 7, 1918. There was also born as a result of this relationship, Louisa Sauls, on June 4, 1920, in Donaldsonville, Louisiana; Ruth Sauls, on March 7, 1925, and Mildred Sauls, on January 17, 1928, near Convington, Louisiana. Sauls was a business man who had mill and logging interests in both Mississippi and Louisiana, and traveled extensively in regard thereto. During this period of time Sauls maintained his marriage relationship with Katie Sauls in Tylertown, Mississippi, as well as maintaining a family relationship with Daisy in the State of Louisiana. He was the sole means of support and the head of both families.

Sauls obtained a decree of divorce from Katie Quin Sauls on July 6, 1936, in the State of Nevada, whereupon he consummated a ceremonial marriage with Daisy in Beauregard Parish, Louisiana, and about this time moved this family, Daisy and the four daughters by her, to Orange, Texas, where Sauls had purchased a residence for them in his name.

Form the time Sauls left with Daisy in 1917 he supported and maintained her as his wife until her death on January 6, 1952. She was accepted as his wife in the State of Louisiana as well as Texas. She was recognized as and referred to as Mrs. Saul or Sauls. She appeared to be a typical American housewife, with no suspicion, as far as this record reflects, of any irregularity in her marriage or relationship with Sauls in either Louisiana or Texas. The children were recognized by Sauls as being his children. They were supported by him, their education was provided by him, and on February 5, 1940, in Texas, Sauls adopted as his own one of the granddaughters. Sauls visited and lived with this family on numerous occasions at the residence in Texas. This relationship continued until Daisy's death, at which time Sauls made the funeral arrangements and paid the expenses of the funeral.

During this same time, Sauls also supported Katie Quin Sauls in Tylertown, Mississippi, in which community they maintained a residence and both were recognized by all as being husband and wife. This relationship, husband and wife, continued without interruption after the Nevada divorce of July 6, 1936, until Katie died on November 21, 1951. Though Sauls was often absent from his residence in Tylertown, Mississippi, he was considered a permanent resident thereof by its citizens, as is evidenced by the fact that he was an Alderman of the City from 1947 to 1957, and by numerous witnesses who testified as to his domicile.

Sauls married Mary A. Sauls, his surviving widow, on January 16, 1954, and lived with her in Walthall County Mississippi, until his death on March 12, 1959. Sauls left no will and his widow was appointed the administratrix of his estate. The inventory of the personal and real property assets of the estate was established at the approximate value of $115,122.60. Included in this aggregate value is 1082 acres of land at $25 an acre and 268 1/2 acres of minerals at $5 an acre.

The record is devoid of any proof that any of the children of Sauls and his first wife, Mattie Dunn, knew of the existence of the appellants, the daughters of Sauls and Daisy, prior to her death in 1952, and then only by surmise as the result of a telephone call by one of the daughters to one of the children of Mattie Dunn Sauls at the time of the death of Daisy. There is no indication that Katie ever knew of the relationship of Sauls, her husband, with Daisy.

The trial court found the four daughters of Daisy to be the natural children of her and Sauls, but not his heirs, as they are illegitimate and as such not capable of inheriting from their father according to the laws of descent and distribution of the State of Mississippi. The court further found the adoption proceeding in the State of Texas wherein Sauls adopted his granddaughter to be legal and adjudicated this adopted daughter to be an heir and capable of inheriting. There being no appeal as to this finding and conclusion of the lower court, this Court adjudicates nothing thereasto. From a decree in accordance with the findings and conclusions of the chancellor, this appeal is taken.

The appellant assigns for consideration by this Court the following:

'I. Sufficient and credible evidence supports finding of chancellor that the four sisters (appellants) are the natural children of Edward Burk Sauls and Daisy Eunice Simmons McCaffey Sauls.

'II. Edward B. Sauls was divorced from Katie or Katherine Sauls in Nevada on July 6, 1936; the validity of this divorce judgment cannot be collaterally attacked by appellees.

'A. The evidence is conclusive that adequate process was had on the defendant in the Nevada proceedings.

'B. The divorce proceedings cannot be collaterally attacked by appellees.

'III. The appellants were legitimatized by acts sufficient in law and fact by Edward B. Sauls and Daisy Eunice Simmons Sauls and therefore inherit from their father.

'A. The appellants were legitimatized in Mississippi, as provided by Section 474, Mississippi Code 1942, Annotated.

'B. Not only were appellants legitimatized under the laws of the State of Mississippi, but they were legitimatized under the laws of the State of Louisiana.

'C. The appellants were legitimatized under the laws of the State of Texas.

'IV. Judicial comity commits Mississippi to give legal recognition to the legitimate status of appellants acquired in Louisiana and/or Texas.'

The first assignment urged by the appellants, that the four sisters are the natural children of E. B. Sauls, Sr. and Daisy Eunice Simmons McCaffey Sauls, is supported by the overwhelming proponderance of the evidence, and we are of the opinion, and so hold, that the chancellor was correct in his decision in this regard.

The second assignment is the primary question to be determined in this suit, that is, was E. B. Sauls, Sr., legally divorced from his wife Katie on July 6, 1936, in the State of Nevada? Appellants contend the appellees cannot attack the proceeding of a sister state as it amounts to a collateral attack and that since Sauls himself, if living, could not attack the decree, neither can his children by Mattie Dunn Sauls, or their descendants, attack such decree as they claim through him. We are of the opinion and so hold that this contention is without merit as the appellants put in issue the decree of the Chancery Court of Washoe County, Nevada, by the allegations of their petition and by the introduction of the record, properly authenticated. This placed upon the appellees the burden of overcoming by proof all presumptions legally arising from the rendition of such decree. The proceedings in the Nevada Court and its decree appeared to be regular in form, and consequently such decree imports the existence of all facts necessary to its lawful rendition. The appellee had the right under these circumstances to refute these presumptions by evidence. Miller v. Miller, 173 Miss. 44, 159 So. 112. Additionally, the Court below held the power of attorney signed 'Katherine Sauls' in Lincoln County, Mississippi, was not signed by Katie Sauls, the wife of E. B. Sauls, Sr. This power of attorney appointed one H. D. Danforth attorney in fact for Katherine Sauls and it was by his answer and appearance in the Nevada Court that such court obtained jurisdiction of the divorce proceedings. The decree of divorce was based upon fraud since the jurisdiction of the court was invoked by forgery. This fraudulent decree was subject to collateral attack in any proceeding. Plummer v. Plummer, 37 Miss. 185; Christian v. O'Neal, 46 Miss. 669; Richardson v. Brooks, 52 Miss. 118; McCraney v. N. O. & N. E. RR. Co., 128 Miss. 248, 90 So. 881; Rowell v. Logan, 243 Miss. 479, 138 So.2d 737.

We move to the decisive question in this suit: Did Katie Sauls sign or authorize anyone to...