Richardson v. Dell

• Decision Date: 11 July 1912
• Citation: 149 S.W. 15,245 Mo. 317
• Parties: AUGUSTA RICHARDSON, Administratrix of Estate of DAVID P. RICHARDSON, Appellant, v. JOHN DELL and JOHN DEE
• Court: Missouri Supreme Court

149 S.W. 15

245 Mo. 317

AUGUSTA RICHARDSON, Administratrix of Estate of DAVID P. RICHARDSON, Appellant, v. JOHN DELL and JOHN DEE

Supreme Court of Missouri, First Division

July 11, 1912

Appeal from St. Louis City Circuit Court. -- Hon. George H Williams, Judge.

Affirmed.

Joseph Wheless for appellant.

Dell and Dee conspired together to obtain the title to the lands in Mexico, and succeeded in their plot. Plaintiff elects to allow the title to stay where they put it, and to be compensated in damages for its value. Under all authorities she is entitled to judgment. "The testimony showed beyond all question that the sale was brought about by the defendant for the purpose of acquiring title, and no other . . It is needless to cite authority to sustain the selfevident proposition that equity will grant relief by taking away from her a title tainted in that way." Stitt v. Stitt, 205 Mo. 155; Angle v Railroad, 151 U.S. 1; Leahey v. Witte, 123 Mo. 207; Stephenson v. Smith, 7 Mo. 610; Damschroeder v. Thias, 51 Mo. 100; Keech v. Sandford, Sel. Cas., Ch. 61; McCourt v. Singer, 145 F. 108; Land Co. v. Comm. Co., 138 Mo. 439; Hampton v. McClanahan, 143 Mo. 501; Cook v. Basom, 164 Mo. 594; Thomas v. Railroad, 62 F. 818; Consolidated Co. v. Murray, 89 F. 827; Railroad v. McConnell, 82 F. 71; Gore v. Condon, 87 Md. 368; Bitterman v. Railroad, 205 U.S. 207; "Case & Comment," Feb., 1908, p. 123; Trust Co. v. Railroad, 163 U.S. 31; Phillips v. Hardenburg, 181 Mo. 463; Hewitt v. Price, 204 Mo. 31; Guinan v. Donnell, 201 Mo. 175; Curtis v. Sexton, 201 Mo. 217; Tetley v. McElmurry, 201 Mo. 382; Hagan v. Bank, 182 Mo. 319; Stark v. Love, 128 Mo.App. 24; Kendrick v. Ryus, 225 Mo. 150; McLain v. Parker, 229 Mo. 68. "Whatever we may think of them separately, when we take them up as distinct charges, they are alleged sufficiently as elements of a scheme. It is suggested that the several acts charged are lawful and that intent can make no difference. But they are bound together as the parts of a single plan. The plan may make the parts unlawful." Swift v. U.S., 196 U.S. 395; Lowe v. Lawlor, 208 U.S. 274; Kilpatrick v. Wiley, 197 Mo. 159. "The very plot is an act in itself." Aikens v. Wisconsin, 195 U.S. 194.

Jamison & Thomas and Blevins & Jamison for respondents.

(1) There is no evidence in the case of conspiracy or fraud on the part of respondents Dell or Dee. Dell was under no moral or legal obligation to Richardson to protect Richardson's title to said mining properties or make payments thereon for Richardson's account. (a) Dell, having done those things which he had a legal right to do, cannot be said to be guilty of fraud or conspiracy. Nations v. Pulse, 175 Mo. 86; Bank v. Guthrey, 127 Mo. 193; Butler v. Manny, 52 Mo. 504; Stewart v. Severance, 43 Mo. 322; Hunt v. Simmons, 19 Mo. 583; Graham v. Carondelet, 33 Mo. 262; Hutchins v. Hutchins, 7 Hill (N. Y.), 104. (b) Dell made no promise to, or contract with, Richardson to make the payments to Mrs. Dee and John Mann. If appellant has any cause of action in the premises, it is against the Cacoma Mining & Smelting Company. (2) If the contracts of the Cacoma Mining & Smelting Company were valid and there was no forfeiture by Richardson of his deed from Mrs. Caroline Dee and John Mann, and the title to the properties remained in said company, appellant cannot recover. The conveyances of said property by Mrs. Dee and John Mann to Dell, under such circumstances would be subject to the title of said company thereto, as Dell had notice of its claim. Randolph v. Wheeler, 182 Mo. 145; Hayman v. Schaffner, 88 Mo. 24; Foote v. Clark, 102 Mo. 394.

BROWN, C. Bond, C., concurs.

OPINION

BROWN, C. --

The Cacoma Mining & Smelting Company is an Arizona corporation, organized in August, 1904, for the purpose of acquiring, buying, selling and owning property of every kind, and doing a mining, concentrating and smelting business for pecuniary profit and purposes of gain. It had an office in the city of St. Louis where meetings of its board of directors were held and its general executive business transacted, and which is, in the petition, called its principal office. It was engaged in the business of mining near Autlan in the Republic of Mexico, where all its mining property was situated, and where the defendant Dee, its vice-president and general manager, resided. The testator, David P. Richardson, of St. Louis was, so far as the record shows, its first president, and was succeeded by the defendant Dell, also of St. Louis, who purchased a large amount of his stock from Richardson. The defendant Dee describes himself as "one of the founders and half owner" of the company. Although the record is meager, it is fair to presume that these two were the originators and promoters of the corporation. After the organization of the company, and during the month of November, 1905, Richardson acquired, by a contract of purchase not set forth in the abstract, from the defendant Dee and his wife, the latter of whom was the owner, a mine at Autlan called the "Volcancillo" or "Buenavista;" also, by a similar contract, from one John Mann a group of six other mining claims, together with an undivided one-fourth interest in the mine "Veta Grande," the other three-fourths of which was the property of the company. These properties seem to have largely constituted the prospective value of the company.

The petition states, in substance, that the plaintiff is the widow of David P. Richardson, and had been duly appointed administratrix with the will annexed of his estate; that Dell was and at all times therein mentioned had been the president of and a large stockholder in the Cacoma Mining & Smelting Company; that Dee was and is its vice-president and general manager, and that Richardson was also a stockholder and member of its board of directors; that by the terms of their purchase from Mrs. Dee and Mann of the mining properties before mentioned he was to pay each of them, besides certain cash payments, one hundred dollars per month; that the contracts of purchase provided that if default should be made for three months in either case the contract of purchase should be forfeited and the title revert to the respective vendors; that on or about the 9th of October, 1906, Richardson made certain contracts by which he sold all said mining properties to the company for $ 75,000; being $ 25,000 for the "Volcancillo;" $ 25,000 for the group of six mines and $ 25,000 for his one-fourth interest in the "Veta Grande." Said gross amount was to be paid in monthly installments of six hundred dollars, beginning November 1, 1906, on the first day of each month until said sum should be paid in full; and in addition to said installments the sum of seven thousand five hundred dollars at the end of the first year, and thirty thousand at the end of the second year, and the full amount remaining unpaid at the end of the third year; and that the failure to make any three of such monthly payments should render the contract and conveyance void. That the company in said contract expressly assumes the payments due from Richardson to Mrs. Dee and Mann under his contracts of purchase and agreed to pay the same regularly as they should become due. That to carry out this purpose a trust agreement was made between the parties to said contract and the Commonwealth Trust Company of St. Louis, by which all payments by the mining company were to be made through the trust company, which was in return to pay the two hundred dollars per month to the said original vendors respectively as provided by their contracts of sale, which arrangement was agreed to and ratified by them, all of which was known to the defendants, the defendant Dell having acted for the mining company in said transactions; that the Volcancillo mine was then extensively worked, and producing large quantities of rich and valuable copper ores which, to the value of many thousand dollars, were ready for shipment and sale, and other large quantities of such ores were ready to be brought to the surface and sold at great profit, all of which would have enabled the company to meet its payments; and that the defendant Dell agreed that if the expected returns were not available in time for said payments he would advance the money necessary to make them until such returns should be received; that on or about January 1, 1907, Dell paid to the trust company five hundred dollars, having previously paid to John Mann three hundred dollars, covering the first three monthly payments for Richardson, and remitted to Mrs. Dee $ 100, and the remaining $ 400 was paid to Richardson by the trust company. That immediately after the execution of the contracts, Richardson became fatally ill and was confined to his bed and unable to attend to any business until the second day of February, when he died.

That during the last illness of Richardson defendants conspired together to bring about a forfeiture of the contracts with Dee and Mann for the purpose of wrongfully depriving the mining company as well as said Richardson of said properties and the proceeds thereof, for the purpose of securing the title to said mines to said Dell, knowing that Richardson was without means to keep up his payments, unless the payments to him by the mining company should be promptly made, and that the said properties would then be forfeited to Mrs. Dee and Mr. Mann. That in furtherance of this plan and conspiracy, Dell, during the month of January, 1907, procured Dee to come to St. Louis, first obtaining from his wife and Mr. Mann full and general powers of attorney with reference to said mining properties and contracts. That before leaving Autlan and on January 12, 1907, he did procure such powers and came to St. Louis, and in pursuance of...