Noble v. Noble

CourtUnited States State Supreme Court of Iowa
Writing for the CourtSHERWIN
Citation130 N.W. 114,151 Iowa 698
Decision Date11 March 1911
PartiesNOBLE v. NOBLE.

151 Iowa 698
130 N.W. 114

NOBLE
v.
NOBLE.

Supreme Court of Iowa.

March 11, 1911.


Appeal from District Court, Plymouth County; F. R. Gaynor, Judge.

Action in equity to recover an interest in real estate. Judgment for the defendant. The plaintiff appeals. Affirmed.

[130 N.W. 114]

Struble & Struble, for appellant.

John R. Carter, for appellee.


SHERWIN, C. J.

Elon J. Noble and the defendant were married in 1887, and lived together until the death of Elon J. Noble in 1908. At the time of their marriage, Elon J. Noble was a widower, with eight children living at home, five girls and three boys. The youngest of these children was 2 1/2 years old, and the oldest, a girl, was 18. One of the children, a boy, was an adopted child, who remained in the family only about a year after their marriage, when he was surrendered to his own father. The other children remained at home until they were married, or went out in life for themselves. When Elon J. Noble and the defendant were married, he owned and lived on the 160 acres of land in controversy in this action, but it was heavily incumbered. In the years following their marriage, however, they cleared off the indebtedness on the farm and accumulated other property. In August, 1894, Elon J. Noble deeded to the defendant four lots, of the aggregate value of about $400, located in the town of James, Iowa. On December 28, 1901, he also deeded to the defendant the 160 acres in controversy, and had the deed duly recorded. The title to the lots and to the farm was in the defendant at the time of her husband's death. The plaintiff herein is a son of Elon J. Noble, and, after his death, he brought this action to recover an interest in the lots and farm as the heir of his father, alleging that the conveyances to the defendant were obtained by her undue influence over his father, and were therefore void. It is further contended that the gift to the defendant was never completed because Elon J. Noble continued to exercise acts of ownership over the land, and because there never was a delivery of the deeds to the defendant. The appellant has presented for our consideration a very exhaustive brief and argument on the legal propositions which are controlling in actions of this kind, but the law of the case is so well settled that it is unnecessary to restate it.

The controlling questions are of fact. First. Were the conveyances obtained by the exercise of undue influence over the grantor? Second. Was there a completed gift, and,...

To continue reading

Request your trial
2 practice notes
  • Mo. Dist. Telegraph Co. v. S.W. Bell Tel. Co., No. 34562.
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Missouri
    • March 18, 1936
    ...company was actively and positively negligent in furnishing to Rose an unsafe place in which to work. Eckles v. Des Moines Casket Co., 130 N.W. 114; Rose v. Mo. Dist. Tel. Co., 43 S.W. (2d) 562. (a) Telegraph company was guilty of active and positive negligence in ordering Rose to climb the......
  • Eckles v. Des Moines Casket Co.
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Iowa
    • March 13, 1911
    ...in his petition against the railway company alleged, as ground of negligence, that the car was in an unsafe and defective condition. [130 N.W. 114] Conceding that both petitions presented the identical issue so far as the condition of the car was concerned, the present petition alleged the ......
2 cases
  • Mo. Dist. Telegraph Co. v. S.W. Bell Tel. Co., No. 34562.
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Missouri
    • March 18, 1936
    ...company was actively and positively negligent in furnishing to Rose an unsafe place in which to work. Eckles v. Des Moines Casket Co., 130 N.W. 114; Rose v. Mo. Dist. Tel. Co., 43 S.W. (2d) 562. (a) Telegraph company was guilty of active and positive negligence in ordering Rose to climb the......
  • Eckles v. Des Moines Casket Co.
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Iowa
    • March 13, 1911
    ...in his petition against the railway company alleged, as ground of negligence, that the car was in an unsafe and defective condition. [130 N.W. 114] Conceding that both petitions presented the identical issue so far as the condition of the car was concerned, the present petition alleged the ......

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