Stoff v. Schuetze

Decision Date14 March 1922
Citation240 S.W. 139,293 Mo. 635
PartiesSTOFF v. SCHUETZE et al.
CourtMissouri Supreme Court

Appeal from Circuit Court, Franklin County; R. A. Breuer, Judge.

Action by Emma Stoff against Mary Schuetze and Louis C. Reese. Judgment for first-named defendant against plaintiff and last-named defendant, and plaintiff appeals. Reversed and remanded, with directions.

James Booth, of Pacific, and Jesse H. Schaper, of Washington, Mo. (Shepard Barclay, of St. Louis, of counsel), for appellant.

John W. Booth, of Union, for respondents.

ELDER, J.

This is an action in equity, instituted February 25, 1916, seeking to establish a constructive trust in favor of plaintiff Emma Stoff and defendant Louis C. Reese in two tracts of land in Franklin County held by defendant Mary Schuetze. Defendant Reese is the brother of plaintiff and defendant Schuetze is the second wife of plaintiff's stepfather. The two tracts of land involved are referred to in the record as the 30 acre tract and the 31 acre tract.

The petition is in two counts. The first count alleges that plaintiff's father, John D. Reese, died in 1859 leaving surviving him his widow, Maria S. Reese, and plaintiff and defendant Reese, his only children; that at the time of his death he was seized and possessed of 54 acres of land, upon which he resided, and about $1,700.00 worth of personal property, consisting in part of ten notes of one Johann Weyrick aggregating $995.00, given for the purchase price of the 30 acre tract of land in suit; that by this last will, duly admitted to probate, said John D. Reese left all of his real and personal estate, after the payment of debts, to Maria S. Reese, his widow, for life, with remainder to plaintiff and defendant Reese equally; that his widow duly qualified as executrix under the said will, and, as such, recovered judgment on April 18, 1860, against the aforesaid Johann Weyrick for $112.01 on one of the aforesaid purchase money notes given by him; that Maria S. Reese subsequently married one John G. Schuetze whereupon her letters as executrix were revoked and her husband was appointed administrator de bonis non of the estate of said Reese; that said John G. Schuetze, as such administrator, thereupon caused an execution to be issued upon said judgment obtained against Weyrick as aforesaid, by virtue of which the 30 acre tract in suit was levied upon and sold, on October 5, 1860, by the Sheriff of Franklin County; that at such sale said John G. Schuetze was the highest and best bidder for the price and sum of $135.00; that the property was sold to him for that price, the same being paid by said Schuetze "with the moneys or funds in his hands as such administrator and belonging to said estate of John D. Reese, deceased," and that a Sheriff's deed was made and delivered to him by the name of "John Schutty"; that said Schuetze and his wife Maria S. from the date of their marriage, lived upon the 54 acres of land left by John D. Reese and used the same, together with the said 30 acre tract, until the death of the said Maria S., which occurred in April 1893, and that plaintiff and defendant Reese lived with them as members of their family until plaintiff and said Reese each reached the ages of their majority and at long intervals thereafter, the relations of all being friendly and happy; that in 1894 John G. Schuetze married defendant Mary Schuetze and thereafter continued to live with her, until the time of his death in February, 1915, upon the said 30 acre tract and an adjoining tract of 31 acres; that at his death said John G. Schuetze left a will, duly admitted to probate, by which he devised, after the payment of debts and funeral expenses and certain nominal bequests, all of his estate, real and personal, to defendant Mary Schuetze, who has ever since been in possession of said 30 acre tract; that although the said John G. Schuetze had taken the deed to said 30 acres in his own name, as a matter of fact the real ownership thereof and title thereto was in Maria S. Schuetze for life with remainer in fee in plaintiff and defendant Reese; that said John G. Schuetze continuously from the date of the Sheriff's deed to him until his death, by his declarations, acts and conduct admitted that he was holding title to said 30 acres in trust for plaintiff and defendant Reese and repeatedly warned them not to consult with lawyers and others with respect to their rights and interests in the same; that plaintiff and defendant Reese, reposing trust and confidence in said Schuetze, and relying upon said declarations, acts and conduct, and believing that title was securely vested in them, never made inquiry or investigation with respect to the status thereof, and did not discover that Schuetze had taken title in his own name and had paid the purchase price therefor with moneys belonging to them and their mother, and did not discover that Schuetze had by his last will devised said tract to defendant Mary Schuetze, until long after the death of said John G. Schuetze; that the acts aforesaid were a fraud upon the rights of plaintiff and defendant Reese and their mother; that defendant Mary Schuetze has refused and still refuses to recognize the title of plaintiff and defendant Reese, wherefore plaintiff prays a decree declaring John G. Schuetze to have been a trustee of said 30 acre tract for plaintiff and defendant Reese, declaring defendant Mary Schuetze such a trustee, and directing said Mary Schuetze to account for the rents and profits of said tract.

By the second count of the petition, after alleging the relationship of the parties as " above mentioned, plaintiff charges that her mother Maria S. Schuetze, being the owner and in possession of $600.00, and desiring to invest the same for the use of herself, plaintiff, defendant Reese, and a daughter Wilhelmina, agreed with her husband, John G. Schuetze, to invest said sum in the purchase of the 31 acre tract in suit, and that the balance of the purchase money, amounting to $600.00, should be paid out of the rents and profits of said 31 acre tract and other adjoining real estate, owned by said Maria S. Schuetze, plaintiff and defendant Reese; that pursuant to said agreement said John G. Schuetze, on March 16, 1874, purchased the said 31 acre tract from one Frederick Peters, applying and using the $600.00 belonging to Maria S. Schuetze, and thereafter the rents and profits aforesaid, and taking the deed thereto in his own name; that afterwards said tract was improved by the erection of buildings and fences thereon, the cost being paid out of the rents and profits derived from said tract. The count then proceeds with allegations similar to those contained in count one, reciting: The subsequent marriage and death of John G. Schuetze; the making by said Schuetze of his last will, devising the 31 acre tract to defendant Mary Schuetze; the admission by said Schuetze that he was holding title to said tract for plaintiff and defendant Reese, their mother and her daughter Wilhelmina; the warning given them about not consulting others with respect to their rights and interests; the lack of investigation by plaintiff and defendant Reese as to the true status of their title; and the fraud perpetrated upon them. The relief sought as to the 31 acre tract is the same as that prayed for in the first count with respect to the 30 acre tract.

The separate answer of defendant Mary Schuetze denies that the notes of Weyrick were given for purchase money; denies that the deed from the Sheriff to John G. Schuetze was made to "John Schutty," but avers that it was made to "John Schuetze"; denies that the consideration for said deed was paid from the funds of the Reese estate; denies that title to the 30 acre tract was ever vested in Maria S. Schuetze for life, with remainder to plaintiff and defendant Reese; denies that John G. Schuetze at any time declared that he was holding title to said tract in trust for plaintiff and defendants, or that he at any time warned plaintiff and defendant Reese not to consult with lawyers or others. The answer then admits the purchase of the 31 acre tract from Peters but denies that the same was bought pursuant to any contract with Maria S. Schuetze and that any part thereof was paid for with moneys belonging to her. It further admits that Maria S. Schuetze was the owner of $600.00 but alleges that during her marriage to John G. Schuetze he used the said money in building improvements on his farm and the 31 acre tract, and that thereafter said Maria S. Schuetze, in consideration of love and affection and one dollar, assigned her interest therein to him. The answer further alleges that John G. Schuetze made final settlement of his administration of the estate of John D. Reese, and was discharged as administrator, by reason whereof the property devised by him to defendant Mary Schuetze is not liable to answer any demand asserted by plaintiff. The answer concludes by alleging that the deeds by which John G. Schuetze acquired were conveyances in fee simple, that since the delivery thereof the said John G. Schuetze and defendant Mary Schuetze have held possession of the premises conveyed as absolute owners thereof, that neither the said John G. Schuetze or defendant Mary Schuetze ever in writing constituted or declared any trust in said lands, that plaintiff has been guilty of laches, and that her alleged right of action accrued during her miniority and was not instituted within thirty years next after she attained her majority, by reason of which it is barred.

The reply was a general denial.

Henry Ehlers, brother of Mary Reese, wife of John D. Reese, testified on behalf of plaintiff that he had purchased the share of his sister Mary in her father's estate, paying her $612 or $613 therefor.

Louis C. Reese, defendant, testified on the part of plaintiff that he was born May 3, 1857, and his sister, plaintiff herein, was...

To continue reading

Request your trial
26 cases
  • Cunningham et al. v. Kinnerk
    • United States
    • Court of Appeal of Missouri (US)
    • October 2, 1934
    ......(2d) 444; Phillips v. Jackson et al., 144 S.W. l.c. 118; Laughlin v. Laughlin, 237 S.W. l.c. 1028; Koppel v. Rowland, 4 S.W. (2d) 816; Stoff v. Schuetz, 240 S.W. 139; Murray v. King, 135 S.W. l.c. 109; Bender v. Zimmerman, 80 Mo. App. l.c. 144; Bent v. Priest, 86 Mo. l.c. 488; Smith v. ......
  • Ambruster v. Ambruster
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Missouri
    • September 4, 1930
    ......Gilmore v. Thomas, 252 Mo. 147; Stoff v. Schuetze, 293 Mo. 635; Bopst v. Williams, 287 Mo. 317, 334; Hull v. Voorhis, 45 Mo. 555; State ex rel. v. Amer. Surety Co., 191 Mo. App. 191; ......
  • Simmons v. Friday
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Missouri
    • September 12, 1949
    ......(2d) 816, 319 Mo. 602; Moulden v. Train, 204 S.W. 65, 199 Mo. App. 509; Butler v. Lawson, 72 Mo. 227; Priest v. Capitain, 197 S.W. 83; Stoff v. Schuetze, 240 S.W. 139, 293 Mo. 635; Davies v. Keiser, 297 Mo. 1, 246 S.W. 897; Watson v. Payne, 143 Mo. App. 721, 128 S.W. 238; Bender v. ......
  • Ambruster v. Ambruster
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Missouri
    • September 4, 1930
    ...... court of equity to account for the property as a trustee. Gilmore v. Thomas, 252 Mo. 147; Stoff v. Schuetze, 293 Mo. 635; Bopst v. Williams, 287. Mo. 317, 334; Hull v. Voorhis, 45 Mo. 555; State. ex rel. v. Amer. Surety Co., 191 ......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT