Redfield v. Redfield

• Decision Date: 23 October 1888
• Citation: 18 N.E. 373,110 N.Y. 671
• Parties: REDFIELD v. REDFIELD et al.
• Court: New York Court of Appeals Court of Appeals

110 N.Y. 671

18 N.E. 373

REDFIELD

v.REDFIELD et al.¹

Court of Appeals of New York.

October 23, 1888.

Appeal from supreme court, general term, Fourth department.

Action by Jessie A. Redfield against Charles T. Redfield et al., executors of Lewis H. Redfield, deceased, to recover the value of certain stocks. Judgment at special term for defendants, which was affirmed by the general term. Plaintiff again appeals. Code Civil Proc. N. Y. § 829, provides that a party to, or person interested in the event of, an action against a personal representative, shall not testify concerning any personal transaction or communication had by the witness with the decedent.

Louis Marshall, for appellant.

Wm. G. Tracy, for respondents.

EARL, J.

The theory of the plaintiff is that in January, 1861, she, having $750 in money, delivered it to her husband, Lewis H. Redfield, for the purpose of purchasing 10 shares of New York Central Railroad stock for her, and that it was arranged between them that the stock should be taken in the name of her husband as trustee for her; that he purchased the stock, and took the certificate in his name as trustee, and delivered it to her; that soon thereafter, without her knowledge or consent, he wrongfully, and in fraud of her rights, and in breach of his trust, took the certificate of stock from her safe, and transferred it to his father, whose name was also Lewis H. Redfield, as collateral security for a loan made to him, and that his father thereafter received large dividends upon the stock, and converted the stock and dividends to his own use. The theory of the defendants, the executors of Lewis H. Redfield, Sr., is that the stock was not purchased with the plaintiff's money, or for her; that it was purchased by her husband for himself; that it was taken in the name of the deceased as collateral security for money loaned by him to his son, and that it was subsequently, for full value, sold by the latter to him, and by him converted to his own use. The evidence on the trial to sustain the theory of the plaintiff was mainly that of herself and her husband, and the defendants gave evidence legitimately tending to sustain their theory. In the formal findings of the trial judge, made by him as the basis of the judgment ordered, he found, as matter of fact, that on or about the 15th day of January, 1861, Lewis H. Redfield, plaintiff's husband, procured to be issued by the New York Central Railroad Company to Lewis H. Redfield, deceased, his father, a certificate for 10 shares of its capital stock, the same shares mentioned in the complaint; that the certificate was issued to the deceased as trustee for his son, who was the beneficial owner thereof, as security for such loans as might be made from time to time by him to his son; that loans were so made, and thereafter all the right, title, and interest of the son in the 10 shares of stock were sold and transferred by him to the deceased for their full market value; that the deceased purchased the stock in good faith, without knowledge or notice of any interest of the plaintiff therein, or of any trust existing in her favor with respect thereto. And he found, as matter of law, that the deceased, by purchase from the plaintiff's husband, became the owner of the stock; and he ordered judgment dismissing the complaint.

We are of opinion that there was evidence justifying these findings of fact. We do not deem it important to call particular attention to the evidence, or to discuss the same, as that has been sufficiently done in the able opinions pronounced at the general term. It was for the trial judge, in the consideration of all the evidence, and in view of some extraordinary features which characterized the plaintiff's case, to determine how far she and her husband, both interested witnesses, were to be believed. But the learned counsel for the appellant challenges these findings, and claims that they are not to govern in this case, because there are other findings which are in conflict with these, and which are more favorable to the plaintiff, substantially sustaining her theory.

At the time of the submission of the case to the judge, plaintiff's counsel presented certain property findings of fact and law, upon which he requested the judge to pass, some of which were refused, and others found; and, so far as they are material, we will now call particular attention to them. The second proposed finding of fact is as follows: ‘The plaintiff and Lewis H. Redfield, the younger, were married in 1856, and during the time of their marriage the plaintiff rented various houses, which she sublet, and thus earned considerable money; so that in January, 1861, she had saved, with the knowledge and consent of her husband, for her own use, the sum of $750. This the judge found. It is not found, however, that that money was used for the purchase of these shares of stock, but simply that she had saved it. The third, fourth, fifth, and sixth findings of fact requested are as follows: (3) ‘Being desirous of investing this money, she decided to purchase with it ten shares of the stock of the New York Central Railroad, and, believing it to be necessary that the stock should stand in the name of a trustee, she being a married woman, she gave the money to her husband, with instructions to purchase for her, in his name as trustee, such stock. (4) On the 15th day of January, 1861, her husband, having received from his wife the money necessary for the purpose of purchasing that stock, directed the firm of Reed & Lathrop to purchase for the account of L. H. Redfield, trustee, ten shares of New York Central stock, and, upon being notified of the fact that such stock had been purchased, he paid to the brokers the money which he had received from his wife for that purpose; and on the 16th day of January, 1861, the brokers delivered to him certificate No. 35,035 of the New York Central Railroad Company for ten shares of stock, which recited that L. H. Redfield, trustee, was entitled to ten shares, of $100 each, of the capital stock of the New York Central Railroad Company; said stock having been issued upon the surrender of certificate No. 34,899, which had been issued to Reed & Lathrop, and by them transferred, on January 15, 1861, to L. H. Redfield, trustee. (5...