Sprague v. Moore

• Decision Date: 18 March 1902
• Citation: 89 N.W. 712,130 Mich. 92
• Court: Michigan Supreme Court
• Parties: SPRAGUE v. MOORE et al.

89 N.W. 712

130 Mich. 92

SPRAGUE v. MOORE et al.

Supreme Court of Michigan

March 18, 1902

Cross appeal from circuit court, Wayne county, in chancery; Flavius L. Brooke, Chancellor.

Bill to construe a testamentary trust deed by Thomas S. Sprague against Irene Sprague Moore and others. From the decree rendered Irene Sprague Moore and others, defendants, and Thomas S. Sprague, as administrator, complainant, appeal. Modified.

George W. Radford, for complainant.

William J. Gray, for defendant R. C. Sprague.

Moore &amp Moore, for other defendants.

HOOKER C.J.

In the year 1876 Mrs. Adeline L. Sprague was possessed of a large fortune. She had then eight children, all of whom are now living, except Amelia, who died intestate and unmarried in 1892, and Hattie, who died in 1889, prior to the execution of the trust deed in question, leaving one child, Gracie Deats who is represented by Irene Sprague Moore, her guardian. Mrs Sprague began to make advances of money to her children in 1876, and these advances continued in various amounts to the several children until she executed a trust deed to Irene Sprague Moore in 1889. There was considerable inequality in the advancements prior to July 1, 1879. After that date, and until the trust deed was made, each of six children (Irene and Amelia not being included) received substantially $600 a year. Mrs. Moore received nothing, and Amelia received only her maintenance, said to be worth about $200 per year. A uniform practice was not followed for the whole period by Mrs. Sprague in taking acknowledgment for payments. No vouchers are shown to have been taken for some of them. Upon other occasions receipts as for advancements were taken, and this was the uniform custom after June, 1880. Before and after that date notes were taken, varying in form, and payable at different periods. On April 22, 1899, Adeline L. Sprague made the trust deed mentioned of all her property to her daughter Irene Sprague Moore, as trustee, for the benefit of her seven living children and one grandchild, viz., Amelia L. Sprague, Irene Sprague Moore, Rollin C. Sprague, George H. Sprague, Mary A. Stofflet, Ida L. Taylor, Thomas S. Sprague, and Gracie Deats, the daughter of Hattie Sprague, deceased. A separate instrument gives the terms of the trust. It provides that Mrs. Moore shall: (1) Manage the property. (2) Pay (a) the expenses of the trust; (b) the mother's debts on which she is liable as principal; (c) 'also all indebtedness which she is or may become liable to pay, whether as surety, indorser, or maker of any promissory notes or other obligations now existing made, or incurred for the accommodation or benefit of others, and which others should, or of right ought to, pay.' (3) Out of the income (a) support the mother; (b) pay funeral expenses, etc.; (c) out of the remaining income 'the trustee, in her discretion, may pay to each of the beneficiaries and to all of full age, alike, annually, a sum not exceeding one thousand dollars per year, and any sum withheld from the minor beneficiary Gracie Deats shall be equalized at, if not before, the termination of the trust.' (4) It names the beneficiaries, and provides that: (a) 'It is my desire, and the purpose of this trust, that they shall share equally and ratably in all past, present, and future benefits received from me and my estate, including said trust estate. I therefore direct that, as soon as practicable after my death said trustee shall proceed to the distribution of the trust estate among all of said persons as if she was executor and this was my last will.' (5) It provides that: (a) 'Obligations heretofore entered into for the benefit of any beneficiaries and hereafter paid by said trustee shall bear interest at six per cent. per annum, and be charged to such beneficiary's share.' (b) 'Should any of said beneficiaries die before me, his or her share shall be paid to his or her estate for distribution according to the laws of Michigan.' (6) A subsequent statement of advances was made, showing the date and amount each child had received, and this statement contained the following clause: 'And for the purpose of enabling the trust to be fulfilled without uncertainty or conflict of right, I hereby relinquish and assign to said trustee, for the purposes of said trust as expressed in said trust instrument, all rights reserved by me under said paragraph seven, said paragraph now having been fulfilled by this declaration.' 'The record shows the date and amount of each item of money received by the different children, and the character of the note or receipt given at the time.' After the creation of the trust, Amelia continued to receive her maintenance until 1892. Thomas was paid nothing, but was credited upon his indebtedness the same amount as was paid to others, who received substantially the same sum yearly, excepting Grace Deats,--to whom a large sum was given in 1896 to equalize her share with others,--and Irene, who has been paid nothing. Amelia L. Sprague died January 13, 1892. Adeline L. Sprague died May 1, 1899, after which this bill was filed by Thomas S. Sprague for an accounting. One phase of the cause has been before this court, and will be found in 84 N.W. 293. Subsequently proofs were taken in the circuit court, and a decree was made, from which several of the parties have appealed, viz., Gracie Deats, Irene Sprague Moore, in her own right, and also as trustee and guardian, and Thomas S. Sprague, as administrator of Amelia. Thomas S. Sprague has not appealed except in the capacity of administrator, and makes but one objection to the decree, and that is that it should have directed the payment of the share of Amelia to her administrator for administration and distribution under the probate laws. The decree provides that: 'It is further ordered, adjudged, and decreed that said beneficiary Amelia L. Sprague became vested of her interest in said estate upon the execution and delivery of said trust deed; that she died prior to the death of Adeline L. Sprague, to wit, on January 13, 1892, and her interest immediately became vested in the other seven beneficiaries named in said trust instrument, subject to the claims of the creditors of said Amelia L. Sprague, said vested interests to be paid at the period of distribution. But it appearing to this court from the evidence that Amelia L. Sprague left no debts, it is therefore ordered, adjudged, and decreed that each of said beneficiaries shall receive one-seventh of Amelia's share of said trust estate, which shall be ascertained separate and distinct from the shares to which the other beneficiaries are entitled in said trust estate; and it appearing from the evidence that Thomas S. Sprague has made a good and valid assignment of his interest in said Amelia's estate to George W. Radford, the one-seventh of said Amelia's estate to which said Thomas S. Sprague would be entitled, because of such assignment, shall be paid to him, said assignee, free and clear of any lien thereon.'

To show clearly the controverted questions, a further statement of fact is necessary. In 1877--some years before the trust deed was made--Mrs. Sprague had made a will, by which she bequeathed her property to her children equally, and this will was superseded by the trust deed, as this court held in its former decision already referred to. At the time this trust was declared it was accompanied by a summary of her dealings with her children, under a title called 'Supplemental,' reading as follows: 'Supplemental. This is the statement of the 'advances, payments, charges, and debts' made by me to my children and held against them, intended, included, and referred to in clause five and seven of trust instrument made by me to Irene Sprague Moore, dated April 22nd, 1889. The advances and charges against my daughter Hattie A. Deats shall be charged against the share which her daughter, Gracie Deats, is to receive under said trust; it being intended that Gracie Deats shall receive the same share and interest in the trust estate as her mother would have received had she been living at the time of the creation of the trust and named as an equal beneficiary thereunder, subject to charges for advances, etc., made to her. And for the purpose of enabling the trust to be fulfilled without uncertainty or conflict of right, I hereby now relinquish and assign to said trustee, for the purposes of said trust, as expressed in said trust instrument, all rights reserved by me under said paragraph seven, said paragraph having now been fulfilled by this declaration. Adeline L. Sprague.' The following tables show the situation at that time:

First Period, to July 1, 1879.

No Voucher. Notes. Total.

Rollin ....... $2,150 00 $4,150 00 $ 6,300 00

Thomas ........ 2,150 00 1,800 00 3,950 00

George ........ 2,250 00 2,250 00

Mary .......... 2,130 75 700 00 2,830 75

Ida ........... 2,150 00 2,000 00 4,050 00

Hattie ........... 50 00 50 00

-----------

$19,430 75

Second Period, July 1, 1879, to April, 1889.

Receipts. Notes. Total.

Rollin ....... $5,350 00 $1,800 00 $ 7,150 00

Thomas ........ 6,000 00 2,350 00 8,350 00

George ........ 8,019 44 400 00 8,419 44

Mary .......... 5,350 00 500 00 5,850 00

Ida ........... 5,350 00 700 00 6,050 00

Hattie ........ 5,350 00 1,200 00 6,550 00

-----------

$42,369 44

It is noticeable from these tables that at the time the trust deed was made no two children had received the same amount, while Irene had received nothing, and Amelia little more than her support. In addition to this, Thomas S Sprague had obtained his mother's indorsement on accommodation paper amounting to $19,600. It is claimed that this made the total amount received by him over $46,000 estimated by counsel for Mrs....