Taylor v. Taylor

• Decision Date: 30 September 1878
• Citation: 69 Tenn. 83
• Parties: S. B. Taylor and Jacob Lincumfelter v. James P. Taylor, Adm'r., and Betsey Lincumfelter.
• Court: Tennessee Supreme Court

69 Tenn. 83

S. B. Taylor and Jacob Lincumfelter

v.James P. Taylor, Adm'r., and Betsey Lincumfelter.

Supreme Court of Tennessee.

September Term, 1878.

FROM JEFFERSON.

Appeal from the Chancery Court at Dandridge. H. C. SMITH, Ch.

SWAN for Complainants.

O. C. KING for defendants.

COOPER, J., delivered the opinion of the Court.

About the year 1828, John Lincumfelter, his sister Betsey and their mother, were living together on rented land. The brother was an industrious, thrifty farmer and good trader, while the sister was an equally industrious, managing and thrifty housekeeper. The mother died in a few years, and the brother and sister continued to live together until the death of the brother in 1860. During the whole period the business was carried on exclusively by the brother, in his own name buying, selling, trading, and loaning money; the property bought, real and personal, being conveyed to him, and all obligations made to or by him. At his death the estate, real and personal, seems to have been estimated at about $10,000, the only land they owned being the farm on which they lived, and the residue of the assets consisting of the personalty on the farm, and debts due. The heirs and next of kin of the intestate were his brother, the complainant Jacob Lincumfelter, and another sister, Polly Taylor, who died on the 17th of August, 1869, having made a will by which she devised her interest in her brother's estate to the complainant, Samuel B. Taylor. At the request of these heirs, the defendant, James P. Taylor, qualified as administrator of the estate of John Lincumfelter. It seems clear, that immediately upon the death of her brother, Betsey Lincumfelter set up a claim to one-half of the estate as having worked it, and helped to make it, and counsel, employed by her, drew up a bill asserting her right to half the property on this ground, and to one-third of the residue as one of the heirs and next of kin of her brother. This bill was not filed at the time, being held up at her request upon the suggestion that matters might be amicably arranged between her and the other heirs, her brother and sister. And the parties did meet together at the house of Polly Taylor, in the presence of James P. Taylor, and other members of the family, at which meeting an inventory of the notes and other evidences of debts due the estate was made, and it was agreed that Betsy Lincumfelter should continue to occupy the farm, and have the personal property thereon, and the administrator should only collect the debts due, without meddling with anything on the farm. The complainants say that at this interview it was agreed that Betsy was to have the use of the farm for life, and the personalty on the farm absolutely, while the remaining assets were to be collected and divided equally beween the brother and two sisters, each of whom was also to have one-third of the realty, subject to the life estate of Betsey. This is denied both by Betsey and James P. Taylor, who say that the agreement, as to the residue of the assets, was, that it was to be left to arbitrators to say how they should be divided. It is certain, however, that while the notes were being inventoried on this occasion, Betsey set up a claim to the note of one Larue, upon the ground that the money was hers for which it was given, and the other heirs agreed that it might be surrendered to her which was done. James P. Taylor says that the agreement was to have been reduced to writing, which however, was never done. Shortly afterwards, the precise date not appearing, Betsey and her brother entered into an agreement in writing, at her house, referring to the farm on which she lived as belonging to the estate of John Lincumfelter, and reciting that Betsey Lincumfelter and Jacob Lincumfelter agree that two disinterested persons should go upon the farm and value it at what they may think to be its true cash value, and Jacob Lincumfelter agrees, so far as he is concerned, Betsey is to have the land at this valuation. This agreement, signed by the parties, and attested, was left with a third person for safe keeping. The administrator having failed and refused to make any settlement, the original bill was filed on the 7th of October, 1870, by Samuel B. Taylor and Jacob Lincumfelter against James P. Taylor, the administrator, and Betsey Lincumfelter, for an account of the administration, and for distribution of the personalty and partition of the realty of the estate of John Lincumfelter. On the 28th of October, 1870, Betsey Lincumfelter filed her answer and cross-bill, in which she renews her claim to one-half of the estate as a co-partner or co-owner with her deceased brother, or, if mistaken in her rights, to compensation for services rendered her brother in the accumulation of the estate.

The theory of the bill is not that there was any contract of partnership between John Lincumfelter and his sister Betsey, but that she contributed, by her labor, to the creation of the estate accumulated, and ought, for this reason, to have an interest in the property to the extent of one-half at least, either as a co-partner of her brother, or by way of resulting trust. “They were poor and penniless,” says the cross-bill, “and by common consent went to work together jointly without any...