Stevens v. Stevens

• Decision Date: 05 June 1925
• Docket Number: No. 26154.,26154.
• Citation: 273 S.W. 1066
• Parties: STEVENS et al. v. STEVENS et al.
• Court: Missouri Supreme Court

273 S.W. 1066

STEVENS et al. v. STEVENS et al.

No. 26154.

Supreme Court of Missouri, Division No. 2.

June 5, 1925.

Appeal from Circuit Court, St. Louis County; John W. McDlhinney, Judge.

Suit by Mary A. Stevens, individually and as next friend, guardian, and curator of Ronald F. Stevens, against Helen K. Stevens and others. Judgment for defendants, and plaintiffs appeal. Affirmed.

Joseph C. McAtee and Henry Higginbotham, both of Clayton, for appellants.

M. F. O'Brien, of Maplewood, and Jos. N. Schindler and Robt. C. Powell, both of St. Louis, for respondents.

HIGBEE, C.

This is an action to declare a deed, absolute on its face, a mortgage, and for partition. Plaintiffs appeal from a judgment in favor of the defendants.

Ronald F. Stevens, by the thrift and industry of himself and his wife, Emma Stevens, had acquired the two properties involved in this action, one a business block, subject to a deed of trust for $3,000, and the other the property where they lived, subject to a deed of trust for $1,500. On March 26, 1906, Stevens and his wife conveyed these properties by a warranty deed for the recited consideration of $5, which was not paid, to James W. Peeler,, and on April 2, 1906, Peeler and his wife conveyed them in fee to Emma Stevens for the recited consideration of $5, which was not paid. Stevens continued to live in the residence property until the death of Emma Stevens, October 12, 1913, and until his death in 1923, during which time he collected the rents of the other property, kept both in repair, and paid all general and special taxes. He administered upon the estate of his deceased wife and inventoried these properties as belonging to her estate. In the year 1916, he married the plaintiff Mary A. Stevens, and died intestate in 1923. His daughter, Helen K. Stevens, and the three minor children of his son, Edwin M. Stevens, deceased, are the defendants in this action. He left surviving him his widow, Mary A. Stevens, and one son, Ronald F. Stevens, a minor, by his second marriage. They are the plaintiffs.

The amended petition alleges that said deeds were made for prudential reasons, and not for the purpose of divesting title out of said Ronald F. Stevens; that it was understood that Emma Stevens was to hold the title in her name in secret trust for said Ronald F. Stevens; that she so received and treated said property during her life; that Ronald F. Stevens continued in possession thereof, collected the rents and income therefrom, paid the taxes and upkeep out of his sole and separate funds, and exercised absolute dominion over the same; that at the time of making said deeds said Ronald F. Stevens had been dissipating for a period of several weeks, and was in a weakened condition, and had been squandering his property while in said condition, and was importuned and persuaded by said Emma Stevens to deed said property to her, and that she then promised to hold said property for plaintiff's husband so that she and plaintiff's husband and the members of their family would have a home and an income during the life of said Emma Stevens and said Ronald F. Stevens, and to prevent further squandering and loss of said property, including the land herein described; that said Ronald F. Stevens had implicit confidence in said Emma Stevens, and relied upon her promise, and so relying did execute said deed, all of which said Emma Stevens well knew; that shortly prior to the time of said conveyances, said Ronald F. Stevens owed $300, which he was required to pay, and said Emma Stevens advanced said sum, which Ronald F. Stevens was obliged to repay to her, and, as security for said sum, conveyed said land to her by and through said conveyances; that the securing said indebtedness was a part of the inducement and consideration for making said conveyances, which, although absolute in form and terms, were in fact and should be treated as an equitable mortgage; that part, if not all, of said indebtedness has been paid, and plaintiffs ask the court to take an accounting, and they offer to pay any sum that may be found due and unpaid on said mortgage indebtedness, and further, in all things offer to do equity in the premises; that in equity and in good conscience the " defendants should be held and declared trustees of these plaintiffs to the extent of all lawful claims in and to the same.

They further state that said property was the sole estate of said Ronald F. Stevens, excepting a small amount of personal property which has been consumed by the allowance of $1,200 in lieu of provisions to plaintiff for a year's support, and by the allowance of $400 as dower in said personal property; that plaintiffs are without adequate remedy at law, and they pray judgment divesting title out of defendants and vesting the same in Ronald F. Stevens, a minor, and in defendants in accordance with their respective rights, and that the same be declared subject to the dower and homestead rights of Mary A. Stevens, etc. Then follows a count in partition, declaring that Mary A. Stevens is the widow of Ronald F. Stevens, deceased; that she is entitled to dower and homestead in said premises; that she is the duly appointed and qualified guardian and curator of Ronald P. Stevens, a minor, etc.

The answer admits the conveyances as pleaded, the death of Emma Stevens, the relationship of the parties plaintiff and defendant, but denies all other allegations. The answer pleads the 10-year statute of limitations, and that Ronald F. Stevens administered upon the estate of Emma Stevens, deceased, and inventoried all the real estate described in the petition as the property of Emma Stevens at the time of her death, and that he made affidavit and swore to the truth thereof, and that he failed to make any claim for the restitution of said real estate in the probate court, and is forever barred from asserting any title or interest therein. The reply is a general denial.

John Tate testified that shortly before the 1906 transfers were made, Mrs. Emma Stevens came to him and said she had to have $300 for her husband; that he had signed a name to a check without authority, and was in danger of prosecution, and she was going to raise the money for him, and he was going to put the property in her name to protect her. Tate loaned her $200, which she subsequently repaid by paying $80 in money, and he took the remainder in rent at $40 per month.

James W. Peeler testified he knew Ronald F. and Emma Stevens. Stevens was in the bakery business, and his wife assisted _him; they lived in two rooms back of the bakery. Stevens then bought a lot and erected a building containing two storerooms and two fiats. He thought this property cost Stevens $7,000 or $8,000; the other property about $4,000. That in 1906 Stevens got to dissipating, and would stay away from his family for weeks at a time. Finally a policeman found Stevens badly intoxicated and took him home. Witness suggested to Stevens that he make the deeds, and Stevens and his wife accordingly executed their deed to Peeler, and the next day Peeler and his wife executed their deed to Mrs. Stevens. The deeds were sent to Clayton to be recorded. Witness had previously suggested to Mrs. Stevens to have the title put in her name; that ...