Redmon v. State Social Security Commission

• Decision Date: 12 July 1940
• Docket Number: No. 6143.,6143.
• Citation: 143 S.W.2d 168
• Parties: REDMON v. STATE SOCIAL SECURITY COMMISSION.
• Court: Missouri Court of Appeals

143 S.W.2d 168

REDMON v. STATE SOCIAL SECURITY COMMISSION.

No. 6143.

Springfield Court of Appeals. Missouri.

July 12, 1940.

Appeal from Circuit Court, Christian County; Robert R. Gideon, Judge.

"Not to be published in State Reports."

Proceeding by George W. Redmon against the State Social Security Commission of Missouri for reinstatement on the State Old Age Assistance Rolls. From a judgment for the plaintiff, the defendant appeals.

Reversed and remanded with directions.

Roy McKittrick, Atty. Gen., and Aubrey R. Hammett, Jr., Asst. Atty. Gen., for appellant.

Omer E. Brown, of Ozark, for respondent.

TATLOW, Presiding Judge.

George W. Redmon was accepted and placed upon the State Old Age Assistance Roll and was thereafter removed from same on the grounds, (1) that he owned property of a value exceeding $1,500 and thereafter and prior to the hearing before the Commission he made a conveyance or transfer of his property for the purpose of rendering himself eligible for benefits; and (2) that 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.

The hearing before the Commission was on the 18th day of July, 1939. The case presents the same procedural questions as the case of Isaac R. Johns, Respondent, v. State Social Security Commission of Missouri, Appellant, 143 S.W.2d 161, decided by this court on this day and handed down contemporaneously with the opinion in the instant case. It is therefore unnecessary to repeat what is there said.

The abstract relating to the various proceedings in the case are identical with that case. There is a fundamental difference in the facts of the case. The evidence certified by the Commission to the Circuit Court is before us and has been carefully examined. No statement, brief or argument has been furnished us by the respondent. But appellant has furnished us a reasonably fair statement of the facts, which we adopt as follows:

"This respondent was granted old age assistance on August 1st, 1937. After an investigation he was removed from the roll in January, 1938, for the reason that he owned property in excess of that allowed by the law. A hearing before the Commission was granted. The Commission denied him old age assistance, and he then appealed to the Circuit Court. The Circuit Court restored him to the old age assistance roll and this is an appeal from that decision. At the time he was placed on the roll he was married and owned a two hundred sixty (260) acre farm in Christian County, Missouri, known as the "home place", in which he and his wife resided. There was a Two Thousand ($2000.00) Dollar deed of trust against this property. He also owned two other tracts of land aggregating one hundred sixty (160) acres both incumbered, and two houses and lots in the City of Ozark, Missouri unincumbered. Respondent's wife was under seventy (70) years of age.

"On the 22nd day of October, 1937, this Respondent's wife died and immediately thereafter said respondent filed in bankruptcy. The three appraisers appointed by the Federal Court of the Western District in the bankruptcy proceedings of this respondent made an appraisal of the property owned by said respondent, which appraisal was properly certified to and made a part of this record without any objection on the part of this respondent. Said appraisal is marked "Commission's Exhibit A". This appraisal shows the valuation of said real estate and the equity in said real estate owned by this respondent to be Thirty-Three Hundred ($3300.00) Dollars, and the personal property to be Three Hundred ($300.00) Dollars.

"There was also introduced in evidence without any objections on the part of the Respondent, "Commission's Exhibit B", wherein this respondent in his schedule in the bankruptcy proceeding listed this two hundred sixty (260) acre farm and valued same at Thirty-Nine Hundred ($3900.00) Dollars, with a deed of trust against said farm amounting to Two Thousand ($2000.00) Dollars. That shortly after his wife passed away, this respondent being the sole beneficiary of an insurance policy on her life, the insurance company tendered him a check for Two Thousand Twenty-Five ($2025.00) Dollars, in full payment of said policy. The testimony is that Mr. Redmon endorsed same and gave the check to his son, who cashed same and kept the money. Respondent claims that he gave his son this insurance money for the reason that he had been paying the annual premiums amounting to $92.90 per annum for some time. The son was unable to state how long he had been making these payments. Respondent further testified that he had an understanding with his son regarding the policy. The son took the Two Thousand Twenty-Five ($2025.00) Dollars and liquidated obligations owed by his father. With the Two Thousand ($2000.00) Dollars he paid his father's creditors he was able to liquidate some Four Thousand ($4000.00) Dollars worth of indebtedness, the Two Thousand ($2000.00) Dollar incumbrance on the two hundred sixty (260) acre farm being a part of the indebtedness which was paid by the son.

"At this time, which was subsequent to the removal from the roll and prior to a hearing before the State Social Security Commission which was held on July 18, 1939, this respondent transferred this two hundred sixty (260) acre farm to his son for no consideration. The settlement on the insurance policy was made by the insurance company with the respondent only, he being the sole beneficiary. The son testified that he paid some of the premiums to Mr. John Hedgepath, who was the cashier of the Ozark Bank, Ozark, Missouri. Mr. Hedgepath testified that he did not represent the Mutual Life Insurance Company of New York, the insurer of this policy, that he had never accepted any payments on this policy from Mr. Redmon or his son and that neither had tendered any to him. That neither said responden...