Stover v. Poole

• Decision Date: 25 February 1877
• Citation: 67 Me. 217
• Parties: MINDWELL STOVER v. MARY L. POOLE et al.
• Court: Maine Supreme Court

67 Me. 217

MINDWELL STOVER v. MARY L. POOLE et al.

Supreme Judicial Court of Maine.

February 25, 1877

BILL IN EQUITY, to remove cloud upon title.

The bill alleges that the plaintiff, the widow of Obadiah Stover in the spring of 1868, was and ever since has been possessed in her own right, in fee simple, of a farm in York in the county of York, where she has resided for about fifty-seven years; that her daughter and daughter's husband, these defendants, claimed title in said land by virtue of a deed which they claim to have had from the plaintiff, September 16, 1868; that the oratrix never signed, sealed, executed and delivered any such deed to her knowledge; that the first she heard of it was about a year before her husband's death when her son Edward told his father that Mark, the defendant had such a deed; that the father laughed at him and said that he had never given any such deed; that the oratrix knew that she never gave any such deed; that after her husband's death, she was shown a bill of sale of the personal property to Mary, the defendant, in consideration of $1100; that neither she nor her husband ever received any money from her daughter; she knew she had never signed or made any such paper. On inquiry she was informed of the following facts That when sick in 1868, and under the doctor's charge and unconscious, under the influence of opium depriving her of all knowledge of what was happening, a certain paper was brought into the house by Mark Poole, and her husband was asked to sign; he asked what it was; Mark said it is no matter, you sign; and he signed the deed without reading it or hearing it read and without any knowledge of its contents. After he signed it, it was taken to the bed and your oratrix was held up in bed, and unconscious of what she was doing, Mark Poole was standing by the side of her bed, and her signature was thus obtained without her knowledge and contrary to her wish and desire, without any reading of the paper in her presence and without any knowledge on her part of its contents. Mark Poole thus obtained the pretended deed of real estate and bill of sale of per sonal property to his wife, fraudulently and without the knowledge or consent of the oratrix. The bill states that the oratrix is desirous to sell lots of land to various parties, the same being desirable for summer residences, and that by reason of the fraudulent deed she cannot sell; it closes with a prayer that the pretended deed and cloud upon her title may be set aside and removed as fraudulent and void.

The answer was in substance that the title to the real estate came from a brother of the female defendant, who on his deathbed and in contemplation of death gave a deed of it to his mother with the understanding and request that it be conveyed, at or before her death, to his sister and her husband, the defendants; that her mother being confined to her bed with a dislocated hip, but in full possession of her mental powers, voluntarily made and delivered the deed in question; that both the deed and the bill of sale were freely, fully, properly and understandingly executed and delivered by said Mindwell, who then knew, whether she now remembers or not, the exact nature, contents, purport and effect of each of said instruments, etc.

The deed in question under which the defendants claim, was dated September 16, 1868, signed, Obadiah Stover and Mindwell Stover, witnessed, acknowledged and recorded; and omitting formal commencement, close, description of premises and clause of qualified warranty, was of the following tenor:

I, Obadiah Stover and Mindwell Stover, wife of Obadiah Stover, both of York, in the county of York and state of Maine, in consideration of the sum of two thousand dollars paid by Mary L. Poole of York in said county, the receipt whereof we do hereby acknowledge, do hereby remise, release, bargain, sell and convey, and forever quit claim unto the said Mary L. Poole, her heirs and assigns forever, all our right, title and interest in and to a certain tract of tillage, pasture and wood land lying in said York and being our homestead farm, and being the same which we now occupy and bounded as follows… … meaning to convey all our real estate which we now own in said York, containing one hundred and twenty acres more or less, with the buildings thereon, reserving to ourselves the use and improvement of the same during our natural lives, being the same conveyed by Samuel H. Stover to Mindwell Stover per deed dated April 23, 1867, recorded in the York registry, book 303, page 373. To have and to hold the same with all the privileges and appurtenances thereunto belonging to the said Mary L. Poole during her natural life and then to her husband Mark Poole, their heirs and assigns forever.

At the May term, 1876, issues were framed for the jury which they returned with the following answers:

1. Was the said deed and bill of sale freely and voluntarily executed and delivered by Mindwell Stover, and was she at the time of the execution and delivery thereof of sound mind and legal capacity to convey her estate and property? Answer, yes.

2. Were the deed and bill of sale procured by any fraudulent practices of the respondents or either of them or any person in their behalf? Answer, no.

3. Were the said deed and bill of sale and each of them executed by said Mindwell Stover with a knowledge of their contents and purport? Answer, yes.

4. Was said deed freely and voluntarily executed and delivered by the said Mindwell knowing and understanding its contents and legal effects? Answer, no.

5. Was the said bill of sale freely and voluntarily executed and delivered by the said Mindwell knowing and understanding its contents and legal effect? Answer, no.

Other facts, and the points raised by counsel appear in the opinion.

S. H. Goodall, for the plaintiff.

N. Hobbs, for the defendants.

DANFORTH J.

This is a bill in equity in which the plaintiff alleges that she is the absolute owner of certain land and personal property therein described, and that the defendants claim to have a deed and bill of sale of the same executed and delivered by her to them. This execution and delivery she denies, setting out substantially that, if they have any such instruments of conveyance they were obtained by fraud and executed and delivered by her unknowingly and in a state of mind when she was unable to appreciate or in any degree understand what she was doing. The prayer of her bill is that upon these grounds the conveyances may be set aside as a cloud upon her title.

The defendants answer severally, claiming that they have a deed of the land described, not absolute, but subject to a life estate in the plaintiff, and a bill of sale of the personal property running to the female defendant. They further deny all the allegations of fraud and improper influence, as well as the plaintiff's want of knowledge, asserting that both instruments were executed and delivered voluntarily with full knowledge and understanding of their contents and legal effect, to carry out an intention previously formed and without any influence or solicitation on their behalf.

The issues thus raised have been submitted to a jury and a verdict rendered, sustained as we think by the testimony negativing all suggestions of fraud and improper influences, and finding that both instruments were executed and delivered voluntarily, that at the time the grantor " was of sound mind and legal capacity to convey her property," and that she had a " knowledge of their contents and...