Sanders v. Gurley

• Decision Date: 28 November 1907
• Citation: 153 Ala. 459,44 So. 1022
• Parties: SANDERS v. GURLEY.
• Court: Alabama Supreme Court

44 So. 1022

153 Ala. 459

SANDERS v. GURLEY.

Supreme Court of Alabama

November 28, 1907

Appeal from Chancery Court, Morgan County; W. H. Simpson Chancellor.

Bill by Elbert Sanders against J. J. Gurley to declare null and void certain deeds executed to the said J. J. Gurley by the father of said J. J. Gurley and the grandfather of complainant, on account of undue influence and incompetency to contract at the time the deed was made. From a decree denying relief this complainant appeals. Affirmed.

The bill alleges that the complainant is the heir of Mary E Gurley, who died prior to Jesse Gurley, her father, and that complainant and respondent are the only heirs at law of said Jesse Gurley; that J. J. Gurley resided on the lands with his father for 10 or 12 years before his death and obtained considerable influence over the father; that the father and mother were both old and infirm, the father partially paralyzed and incapable of making the deed, and many other facts along the same line. The deed was made an exhibit, and provides that on account of the care, protection, and support already rendered to Jesse and Elizabeth Gurley, and in consideration of the continued care, protection, and support during their future life, they granted, bargained, sold, and conveyed unto the said J. J. Gurley the land described in the bill. The wife, in consideration of the care, protection, and support, released, remised, and quitclaimed all her right title, and interest in dower and homestead in said lands. The deed contained a further condition of a reservation or control of the land during the life of the grantors and a condition that, if the grantee failed to comply with the terms thereof, the deed should be null and void. The evidence tended strongly to establish the compliance with the terms and conditions of the deed.

P. M. Brindley, A. A. Griffith, and John R. Sample, for appellant.

S. R. Lynne, for appellee.

ANDERSON J.

"A donation from the parent to the child, alone and of itself would raise no presumption of undue influence, since, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, the parent is presumably the dominant party. If undue influence is charged in such case, the burden is upon the parent to show it." McLeod v. McLeod, 145 Ala. 269, 40 So. 414. The conveyance in the case at bar was not a mere donation, but provided for the care and support of the grantor and his wife during their lives as the...