Reddin v. Dunn

• Decision Date: 14 November 1892
• Citation: 31 P. 947,2 Colo.App. 518
• Parties: REDDIN v. DUNN et al. [1]
• Court: Colorado Court of Appeals

31 P. 947

2 Colo.App. 518

REDDIN v. DUNN et al. ^[1]

Court of Appeals of Colorado

November 14, 1892

Appeal from district court, Arapahoe county

Action by Sarah Dunn and others against William G. Reddin and others. Judgment for plaintiffs. Defendant Reddin appeals. Affirmed.

The other facts fully appear in the following statement by REED J.:

On the 1st of January, 1889, Sarah Dunn (appellee) was the owner of a tract of land adjoining the town of Yuma, Washington county, a part of which had been subdivided into lots, some of which had been sold. It appears that she was addicted to drinking, becoming intoxicated at times, whenever a favorable opportunity offered. Knowing this fact, one James W Brown who kept a house of ill fame, on the evening of January 3 1889, at 7 or 8 o'clock, with a woman claiming to be his wife, visited Mrs. Dunn, the Brown woman carrying with her a bottle of whisky and a box of cigars. The three, at least ostensibly, started in to have a good time, and destroy the contents of the bottle; Mrs. Dunn, with an appetite that needed no prompting, but nevertheless being prompted by the benevolence of the Brown female. When the absorption of the fluid was generously and satisfactorily under way, Mr. Brown left the house, leaving the woman to manipulate Mrs. Dunn, if any manipulation was necessary. Some time during the evening Brown returned, and, with him, Granville E. Pendleton, said to be an attorney at law, who had formerly been consulted by Mrs. Dunn in regard to her legal matters. Mr. Brown informed her of some threatened lawsuit that might endanger her title to her land. Mrs. Dunn spoke of a suit in regard to a sewing machine, also to be brought, and desired Pendleton to defend her. Mr. Pendleton advised that she "put the land out of her hands" until the lawsuits were over, assuring her that Brown and he would see she was not beaten out of it. Brown and Pendleton, finding matters working satisfactorily, left about 10 o'clock, and went up town. Some time after, same evening or night, they returned, bringing with them one Hampton, a notary public. A warranty deed was presented to Mrs. Dunn, which was by her executed, conveying all her land, including town lots, to the man Brown. It is not claimed that any consideration passed. Subsequently Mrs. Dunn, having recovered from her debauch, became alarmed in regard to what she had done; also threatened the parties connected with the conveyance with criminal prosecution. Thereupon, to adjust the matter, Pendleton drew up the following paper: "This agreement, made this 8th day of January 1889, by and between James W. Brown and Sarah Dunn, of the town of Yuma, Washington county, Colorado, witnesseth, that whereas, James W. Brown has bought certain real estate of Sarah Dunn adjoining the town of Yuma, Colorado, [description of property:] Now, the said Brown agrees to hold said land under the deed which he has, and he agrees to sell such lots as he can, and keep a just and true account of all such sales and amounts derived therefrom, and to properly account for the same from time to time, as occasion may require; and it is further agreed that at any time when these parties to this agreement shall agree among themselves to make out any new deeds to or for this land, that the same can be done at such time as these parties may agree upon, and on any such terms as may be satisfactory to themselves. It is further agreed that a just and proper account shall be kept of all sums of money that may be paid by the said James W. Brown to the said Sarah Dunn, or her order; and the same is to be properly accredited to the proper party. James W. Brown agrees to keep, fulfill, and perform all the agreements that he has made herein regarding the property in question, and to make such settlements, from time to time, as may be proper and satisfactory to the parties to this agreement. Given under our hands this 8th day of January, 1889, at Yuma, Colorado. [ Signed] JAMES W. BROWN. [ Signed] SARAH DUNN. Witness: ROSA TOTTEN." It also appears that there was one John M. Abbott residing in the same town, claiming to be an attorney at law, who prior to and at the time was the legal and confidential adviser of Mrs. Dunn, in whom she had full confidence. Him, it appears, the parties Brown and Pendleton found it necessary to placate in order to carry out their plans. He appears to have taken kindly to it, and to have been readily placated. There was also one John H. Reddin, claiming to be an attorney at law, who claimed to have some rights against the land of Mrs. Dunn, which he had been trying to, or threatened to, enforce. His acquiescence and co-operation became important, and he was initiated. These preliminaries having been successfully arranged, on the 12th day of January, nine days after the execution of the deed by Dunn, and four days after the execution of the contract, Brown, Pendleton, Abbott, and John H. Reddin met, and proceeded to distribute and administer the real estate of Sarah Dunn. A number of lots were conveyed by Brown to Abbott, a number by Brown to Nancy E. Pendleton, wife of G.E. Pendleton, and the balance to John H. Reddin; and on the same date, at the same time, John H. Reddin conveyed to William G Reddin the property conveyed to him (John H. Reddin) by Brown. Pending these transactions, and while details were being arranged, it appears G.E. Pendleton and Brown entered upon some negotiations in regard to the residence, furniture, piano, etc., of Brown, which transaction culminated at the same time Brown concluded his conveyance of the Dunn property, by which Nancy E. Pendleton succeeded to the estate, real and personal, of Brown in the town of Yuma, and Mr. Brown, Mrs. Brown, the dispenser of cigars and whisky, and the "maid servants" who assisted in occupying the house, precipitately left the country. In all these transactions it is not claimed, nor attempted to be shown, nor is there any pretense, that any consideration whatever passed, except as between John H. Reddin and Brown. John H. Reddin paid Brown cash, $1,250; claims to have been an innocent purchaser for value, and poses as a victim. Abbott and Pendleton do not claim to have paid for the property conveyed to them, respectively, but claim they had earned it as "commissions" in the transactions. After the parties had got through with the distribution of Mrs. Dunn's estate, she conveyed an interest in it to one John Whitly, or rather, to her attorneys, who conveyed to Whitly. Dunn and Whitly brought suit against the various parties, asking that the conveyance of Mrs. Dunn to Brown, and from Brown to his various grantees, be canceled, and all the transactions pertaining to the property be declared void. William G. Reddin was the only defendant that answered. He did so at great length, traversing the allegations of the complaint relating to himself, claiming to be an innocent purchaser for a valuable consideration, etc. An extended trial was had to the court, resulting in a finding and decree for the plaintiffs that each and every of the deeds were void, and awarding judgment for costs, from which judgment and decree an appeal was taken to this court.

James H. Brown, Milton Smith, and Reddin & O'Hanlon, for appellant.

Sullivan & May, for appellee.

REED J., (after stating the facts.)

Comment upon the character and facts of the case is unnecessary. If a judge had the ability to do justice to it by the use of our language, it would only be misdirected energy. A more marked case of bungling, stupid conspiracy to rob a drunken ignorant woman, and divide the proceeds, cannot be found in court records. The case of the individual who was traveling from Jerusalem to Jericho, "and fell among thieves, who...