Nichols v. State Social Security Commission

• Decision Date: 01 December 1941
• Docket Number: No. 20024.,20024.
• Citation: Nichols v. State Social Security Commission, 156 S.W.2d 760 (Mo. App. 1941)
• Parties: NICHOLS v. STATE SOCIAL SECURITY COMMISSION OF MISSOURI.
• Court: Missouri Court of Appeals

156 S.W.2d 760

NICHOLS v. STATE SOCIAL SECURITY COMMISSION OF MISSOURI.

No. 20024.

Kansas City Court of Appeals. Missouri.

December 1, 1941.

Appeal from Circuit Court, Gasconade County; R. A. Breuer, Judge.

Proceeding by William S. Nichols for old age assistance. The State Social Security Commission made an award denying the application, and from a judgment remanding the cause to the Commission for further consideration, the Commission appeals.

Reversed and remanded, with directions, and cause transferred to the Supreme Court.

Roy McKittrick, Atty. Gen., and B. Richards Creech, Asst. Atty. Gen., for appellant.

A. C. Mueller, of Hermann, for respondent.

SHAIN, Presiding Judge.

William S. Nichols, a colored man of approximately seventy years of age, suffering from rupture, Bright's disease, and other ailments rendering him unable to provide for himself, applied to the State Social Security Commission of Missouri for relief.

A hearing was had in the above matter and the award of the Commission was as follows: "That the claimant has income, resources, support and maintenance to provide a reasonable subsistence compatible with decency and health and is not found to be in need. Therefore, claimant does not come within the purview of the statute and application for old age assistance is denied."

Claimant appealed, and his case was reviewed in the Circuit Court of Gasconade County, Missouri. The judgment of the Circuit Court is as follows: "Now on this day this cause coming on to be heard, comes Plaintiff by his attorney of record, and attorneys for Defendant having heretofore agreed to present the case on the merits of its record, and now this cause is taken up by the Court. The Court being fully advised in the premises and after due consideration, it is ordered, considered and adjudged by the Court that the award of the Commission is found to be unreasonable, arbitrary and against the purpose and spirit of the law, and the findings being remanded to the Commission for further consideration."

From the judgment of the Circuit Court, the Commission has appealed.

Summary of Facts.

It appears from the record before us that the aged, sick, and decrepit applicant has resided for many years with his daughter and her husband. It is disclosed that the claimant for years has been incapacitated and has been often in need of medical and surgical attention. However, the daughter and her husband have done remarkably well in supplying the old man's needs during the adversities of life, and have been true to their filial and moral obligations to the aged parent.

The record discloses the claimant had, about fifteen years prior to the application, owned a farm in Osage County but had disposed of same and had bought a two room house and lots in Gasconade County at a cost of approximately $1,000, and which are now assessed for taxation at $350. About eight years prior to the application of the claimant, he transferred the above property to his son-in-law, David A. Cooper. The claimant explains that he transferred the property to David as compensation for what he owed him.

The following questions and answers appear in the testimony of David A. Cooper:

"Q. Getting back to this transfer — that was made in '33, and what was the consideration? A. Well, the old gentlemen was sick and I was taking care of him and he did have another daughter. She is dead now. She died with consumption and went down to El Paso, Texas, only the old gentlemen paid practically all the expenses and then he got sick and that cleaned him up, and of course he was financially unable to pay his own bills and we had to cooperate with him on his bills, and so he has to give them more than their part already, and he didn't want them to come and take the money I had to put out of my pocket, and he thought at the time if he had any business to straighten out he had better do it because he was liable to pass out at any time.

"Q. And the consideration for this transfer was bills you had paid for him and previous board and care and keep? A. That is right.

"Q. And you had no stipulation as to anything in the future on that? A. That is right.

"Q. I will ask you whether that deed shows any stipulation? A. No, it doesn't."

The appellant, contending that the evidence shows that the claimant is not in need, calls attention to and sets out the testimony upon which the contention is based as follows:

"Q. And during those four or five years your son-in-law, David Cooper, and his wife have been taking care of you and supporting you? A. Yes.

"Q. And are they doing that now? A. Yes.

* * * * *

"Q. Can you give us some idea of the amount. Was it $10,000.00 or $5,000.00, or how much? A. It wasn't but a little. I got, I believe, $1300.00 for it, something like that. That has been 15 years ago, maybe more.

* * * * *

"Q. Did you purchase your home property, where you are living out of the proceeds of the farm? A. Yes. * * *"

Also, the following excerpts from the testimony of Mrs. David Cooper.

"Q. How long has your father made his home with you? A. Just about ten years altogether now.

"Q. And during that time have you and your husband furnished the necessities of life? A. Yes, sir.

* * * * *

"Q. And who is providing for him? A. Me and my husband.

"Q. Does it all come out of your husband's earnings? A. Yes, sir.

"Q. And you are now supporting him and providing him with the necessities of life? A. Sure. * * *"

And the following excerpts from the testimony of David A. Cooper, son-in-law of plaintiff.

"Q. What is your salary? A. $1320.00 per year less three and one-half percent retirement fee.

* * * * *

"Q. But since he transferred the place, he has continued to live with you? A. Yes, sir.

"Q. And you are now furnishing him the necessities of life? A. Yes, sir.

"Q. From your present salary you have been able to meet your current living expenses and provide a reasonable living for you and your wife and father-in-law, have you not? A. Yes, sir, we haven't suffered."

Mae Crowder, the Social Security Secretary-Director of the Commission in Gasconade County, Missouri, was called as a witness for the Commission. Miss Crowder had prepared a budget of the monthly income and expenditures of the David Cooper family, and the same appears as an exhibit. As to this budget, her evidence discloses that same was made up from an inquiry made of applicant and husband and wife. However, David, the source of all income of the family, testifies that he was not consulted.

There is shown for a family of three, monthly food, $22.50; property upkeep, $2.50; health and medical supplies, $5.00; household supplies, .99; and other items, taxes not included, totaling $62.35. The income is shown to be $106 per month.

Based upon the yes and no answers set out, supra, and the budget prepared by the Secretary-Director, a finding of fact is possible that would rival a Micawber's ideal of affluence. However, there is no substantial evidence to support the showing presented in the budget prepared by the Secretary-Director. The facts are that all of the substantial evidence exposes the fallacy of the estimated expenditures.

The evidence shows that David Cooper is an employee of the United States Government yards in Gasconade, with a salary of $106.14 per month. Mr. Walther, a merchant, was called as a witness and testified that Dave Cooper ran a monthly bill at his store and that same ran from $40 to $50 per month.

The following questions and answers appear in Walther's testimony:

"Q. Does he run a bill by the month with you? A. Yes, sir.

"Q. And how often does he pay, once a month? A. Once a month.

"Q. How long has he been running that bill? A. Ever since he has been in Gasconade.

"Q. What do you handle there? A. We handle general merchandise.

"Q. Do you handle dry goods? A. Yes, sir.

"Q. Gas and oil? A. Yes, sir.

"Q. Does that forty to fifty dollars include all the Nichols — A. Cooper, not Nichols.

"Q. That includes some gas and oil, doesn't it? And clothes? A. Not much clothes. Some gas and oil.

"Q. That is all."

As directed to the showing of the budget, the following questions and answers appear in the testimony of David Cooper:

"Q. And I will ask you on that first item of food — that shows $22.50 — is that about the right amount of food you — A. No.

"Q. About how much is that? A. The bill is between forty and fifty dollars each month. The stuff I buy at the store and also I try to get out and buy most of my fresh meat cured up in the fall and we have our lard. We don't have to buy that. We buy quite a bit of our stuff we don't get at Mr. Walther's.

"Q. In other words, this forty or fifty dollars you pay Mr. Walthers every month does not include all of it? A. No.

"Q. Do you buy anything from anybody— A. I do. I buy quite a bit from Krogers and buy things from a butcher that peddles meat."

Cooper estimates the expenditures occurring during the severe sickness of the applicant as follows:

"Q. How much were the doctor bills you paid for him? A. I can't tell you that exactly. His operation — I don't remember what it was — but I think it was $35.00. He had some ex-ray pictures taken. That was added. He had to go up there every day and I took him up in my car. He wasn't able to go on the train. I don't remember how many trips I taken him up there, but it was quite a few, and after he got able he went on the train by himself. The treatments was two or three dollars each treatment they gave, after he was operated on.

"Q. Would the total medical expenses be more than $100.00, you think? A. Yes, I think it would.

"Q. As much as $200.00? A. I imagine it would. Right close to $200.00."

As to the train trips referred to, the railroad agent testified to trips by claimant as every other day in February, March and April, 1933, and the round trip fare being $2.15.

As to indebtedness, David Cooper testifies as follows:

"Q. Have you any indebtedness? A. Oh, Yes.

"Q. And about how...