Slaughter v. McManigal

• Decision Date: 09 June 1908
• Citation: 116 N.W. 726,138 Iowa 643
• Parties: SLAUGHTER ET AL. v. MCMANIGAL ET AL.
• Court: Iowa Supreme Court

138 Iowa 643

116 N.W. 726

SLAUGHTER ET AL.

v.MCMANIGAL ET AL.

Supreme Court of Iowa.

June 9, 1908.

Appeal from District Court, Jasper County; Byron W. Preston, Judge.

Action for partition of 240 acres of land in Jasper county among the heirs of Solomon M. Slaughter. Partition was resisted by the heirs of Joseph and Belinda Slaughter, from whom Solomon acquired title, on the ground that the conveyance to him was void for want of mental capacity and undue influence. By cross-bill and petition of intervention similar issues were raised with reference to a deed from Joseph and Belinda Slaughter to Z. T. Slaughter, otherwise known as Taylor Slaughter, a brother of Solomon. Two claims against the estates of Solomon and Taylor Slaughter, respectively, in favor of Mary Blanford and W. S. Slaughter, otherwise known as Scott Slaughter, were consolidated with the equitable action for partition, and there was a decree sustaining the validity of the deed and disallowing the claims against the estates. From this decree, Mary Blanford and Scott Slaughter appealed. Affirmed.Cragan Bros., F. H. Clements, and O. P. Meyers, for appellants.

McElroy & Cox, E. J. Salmon, and Henry Silwold, for appellees.

McCLAIN, J.

In 1893 Joseph Slaughter and Belinda Slaughter, husband and wife, executed two deeds, each for 240 acres of land in Jasper county, to their sons Solomon and Taylor, respectively, in each of which life estates were reserved to the grantors, and a charge was made for the payment of $3,000 after the termination of said life estates, in the one case to the children of Scott Slaughter, and in the other case to Mary Blanford. These four were the children of Joseph and Belinda Slaughter. There was another child who had been otherwise provided for, and whose heirs, made parties to this proceeding, are not concerned in the result, except that if these deeds are set aside they will be entitled to share in the partition of the land. The title of all the land thus conveyed was in Belinda Slaughter. This action as originally instituted after the death of Joseph and Belinda Slaughter was for the partition of the land conveyed to Solomon Slaughter among his heirs, subject to the payment of $3,000 to the children of Scott Slaughter as provided in the conveyance. The heirs of Joseph and Belinda Slaughter, being made parties defendant, resisted the partition asked, on the ground that the conveyance to Solomon Slaughter was in valid, as made without mental capacity and under undue influence. By cross-petition and petition of intervention similar issues were raised with reference to other land conveyed at the same time by Joseph and Belinda Slaughter to Taylor Slaughter, subject to a life estate to the grantors, and with the charge of the payment on the termination of the life estate of $3,000 to Mary Blanford. In the original cross-bill and petition of intervention Mary Blanford and Scott Slaughter asked by way of alternative relief that they be decreed to have an equitable mortgage on the two tracts of land respectively for the payment of $3,000 to each of them, in addition to any amounts named in said alleged deeds. Subsequently each of said appellants filed claims against the estates of Taylor Slaughter and Solomon Slaughter for the payment of $3,000 to each under an alleged family settlement, in which it had been agreed by Solomon Slaughter and Taylor Slaughter that each of the appellants should receive that amount on the termination of the life estates reserved to Joseph and Belinda Slaughter under said deeds, or at the expiration of a year thereafter. The administrators of the estates thereupon intervened in the partition proceeding, and asked that all the rights of the parties be determined in the proceeding and on motion of said administratorsthe claims of Mary Blanford and Scott Slaughter against said estates were consolidated with the partition proceedings. The administration on the estate of Solomon Slaughter in Jasper county was ancillary, his estate having already been fully settled in a probate proceeding in Nebraska, of which state he was a resident at the time of his death. There are two branches of the case, therefore, the one involving the validity of the deeds of Solomon and Taylor Slaughter, the other involving the validity of the claims of Mary Blanford and Scott Slaughter against the estates of Solomon and Taylor Slaughter for the payment of $3,000 to each, outside of the provisions in the deeds in behalf of Mary Blanford and the children of Scott Slaughter.

1. Although undue influence is alleged as a ground of attack on the deeds, there is scarcely a scintilla of evidence that any influence was exerted on the grantors with reference to their execution. Solomon Slaughter, the grantee in the first, was a nonresident, and had no knowledge that the deed was being made until after it was executed and recorded. Taylor Slaughter, the grantee in the other deed, was perhaps at the time of the making of the deeds the tenant of a portion of the home farm, although it does not appear that he resided thereon. There was some showing that Taylor was frequently consulted by his father about his business affairs, and that in selling the produce from his father's farm he sometimes took checks in his own name so that he might receive the money without waiting until his father should indorse such checks or present them at the bank in person. But there is no evidence that Taylor Slaughter drew the deeds or had any knowledge of their execution until after they were recorded, nor that he had anything to do by way of advice or otherwise with the conception or execution of the...