Prickett v. Prickett

• Court: Illinois Supreme Court
• Writing for the Court: SHAW
• Citation: Prickett v. Prickett, 379 Ill. 181, 39 N.E.2d 984 (Ill. 1942)
• Decision Date: 11 March 1942
• Docket Number: No. 26296.,26296.
• Parties: PRICKETT v. PRICKETT et al.

379 Ill. 181

39 N.E.2d 984

PRICKETT

v.PRICKETT et al.

No. 26296.

Supreme Court of Illinois.

Jan. 20, 1942.

As Modified on Denial of Rehearing March 11, 1942.

Appeal from Circuit Court, Cook County; Philip J. Finnegan, judge.

Suit by Rebecca Prickett against William Prickett and others for reconveyance of realty and an accounting. From a decree for complainant, defendants appeal.

Affirmed.

John B. King, of Chicago, for appellant.

James P. Byrnes, of Chicago, for appellee.

SHAW, Justice.

Rebecca Prickett filed her complaint in equity in the circuit court of Cook county, seeking a reconveyance of certain real estate and an accounting for an increase of $500 in a loan made against the property. The chancellor, in affirming the findings of the master, ordered a reconveyance of the real estate in litigation, ordered the appellants to account to appellee for all rents collected and the increase of the mortgage indebtedness from $1,500 to $2,000.

The facts as recited in the chancellor's decree are as follows: On January 2, 1935, Rebecca Prickett and her husband Fred were owners in joint tenancy of two parcels of real estate, one a vacant lot located in DuPage county, Illinois, and the other improved with a two-flat brick building situated in Cook county, Illinois. On November 8, 1934, plaintiff and her husband entered into a contract with the Midland Development Company of Chicago for the purchase of a vacant lot. Shortly thereafter John E. Van Natta, attorney and legal advisor for Fred Prickett, advised appellee and her husband that they were personally liable under the contract, and since there was an unpaid balance due on this contract, the Midland Development Company could sue them and recover judgment against them. Acting on the advice of Mr. Van Natta, and in order to avoid a lien of judgment against the premises, the Pricketts conveyed both parcels of real estate to Vail A. and William H. Van Natta, sons of the appellant John E. Van Natta. These deeds were executed on January 2, 1935, and the deed conveying the two-flat brick building was recorded on January 5 of the same year. On May 23, 1936, William H. Van Natta quitclaimed all his interest in both parcels to his brother Vail and wife, jointly. The deed conveying the improved property was recorded June 29, 1936. The Pricketts did not receive any consideration for this conveyance.

Prior to August 1, 1939, the property in Cook county was encumbered by a trust deed securing the payment of $1,500. On August 1, 1939, Vail A. Van Natta and his wife executed a trust deed on this property to Alexander Glanz to secure $2,000, bearing interest at 5 1/2 per cent. The sum of $1,500 was paid on the prior trust deed by Vail A. Van Natta and wife, and it was released. Subsequently, on January 22, 1940 Vail A. Van Natta and wife conveyed to William Prickett (brother of Fred Prickett) and Belle Prickett, his wife, a one-half interest in the apartment, and this was recorded on March 8, 1940. Likewise, on January 27, 1940, Vail A. Van Natta and wife conveyed to Clarence Sprague and Laura McInnis a one- half interest in the same property, and this also was recorded March 8, 1940. Fred Prickett died January 4, 1940. The vacant property was conveyed to William Prickett and Belle Prickett, jointly, by Vail A. Van Natta and his wife. Clarence Sprague and Laura McInnis have conveyed to appellee all their right, title and interest in the improved property. The litigation now before us is not concerned with the vacant property located in DuPage county.

The chancellor found that the legal title to these properties was placed in William H. and Vail A. Van Natta in trust for the Pricketts; that the Pricketts did not authorize the conveyance of either parcel, and that these conveyances were made without consideration; and further, that the equity in all of these premises belonged to and is the sole property of the appellee, as surviving joint tenant of Fred Prickett, her deceased husband. The chancellor also...