Tyson v. Tyson

• Decision Date: 22 February 1873
• Citation: 37 Md. 567
• Parties: CHARLOTTE E. TYSON, Fanny H. Tyson and Jesse Tyson, Infant Children of Isaac Tyson the Third, and Fanny H. Tyson, by Their Next Friend, George W. Norris v. JAMES W. TYSON and Jesse Tyson, Executors of Isaac Tyson, Jr.
• Court: Maryland Court of Appeals

37 Md. 567

CHARLOTTE E. TYSON, Fanny H. Tyson and Jesse Tyson, Infant Children of Isaac Tyson the Third, and Fanny H. Tyson, by Their Next Friend, George W. Norris v. JAMES W. TYSON and Jesse Tyson, Executors of Isaac Tyson, Jr.

Court of Appeals of Maryland

February 22, 1873

Appeal from the Superior Court of Baltimore City.

On the 5th of June, 1871, the appellants filed their petition and caveat in the Orphans' Court of Baltimore City, alleging that the codicils of the 12th of April, 1860, and the 15th of January, 1861, to the will of Isaac Tyson, Jr., dated the 7th of January, 1860, were procured by fraud and undue influence practiced by the appellees upon the testator, when his mental powers were enfeebled from age and ill-health. Issues were prayed to be sent for trial to the Superior Court of Baltimore City. The appellees answered the petition, denying that said codicils were procured of the testator by fraud imposition or undue influence, and affirming that the testator at the time of executing and acknowledging said codicils, was of sound and disposing mind, and capable of executing a valid deed or contract, and so reamined up to the day of his death. The Orphans' Court directed the following issues to be sent to the Superior Court, for trial:

1. Was the codicil dated the 12th of April, 1860, executed by Isaac Tyson, Jr., when he was of sound and disposing mind, and capable of executing a valid deed or contract?

2. Was the said codicil of the 12th of April, 1860, executed by the said Isaac Tyson, Jr., under the influence of suggestions, or importunities or misrepresentations, when his mind, from its diseased or enfeebled state, was unable to resist the same?

3. Was the said codicil of 12th of April, 1860, procured by undue influence, fraudulent devices, importunities misrepresentations, and deceits practiced upon the said Isaac Tyson, Jr., which under the circumstances did not leave him free in the disposition of his estate?

4. The same as No. 1, except that it applied to the codicil dated the 15th of January, 1861.

5. The same as No. 2, except that it applied to the codicil of the 15th of January, 1861.

6. The same as No. 3, except that it applied to the codicil of the 15th of January, 1861.

7. Was the said testator, at any time subsequent to the execution of said codicils of the 12th of April, 1860, and the 15th of January, 1861, or either of them, desirous of altering or cancelling the same, and was he prevented therefrom by management, fraud, undue influence or importunities?

Upon the trial of the foregoing issues, the jury found for the defendants, the caveatees, on each and all of them. The facts of the case are presented with sufficient fullness in the opinion of the court, and the dissenting opinion of Judge Bowie.

Exception.--Upon all the testimony, the plaintiffs, the caveators, offered five prayers, the first, second, third and fifth of which are substantially set out in the opinion of Judge Bowie, and the fourth is as follows:

4. If the jury believe the facts above set forth, and that said facts continued at the date of the codicil of the 15th of January, 1861, those facts are evidence from which the jury may find that said codicil was obtained by fraud and undue influence.

The defendants, the caveatees, offered the following prayers:

1. That if the jury shall find from all the evidence in the cause that the said Isaac Tyson, Jr., made and executed the paper-writing which has been offered in evidence in this cause, dated on the twelfth day of April, 1860, purporting to be a codicil to his last will and testament, as testified to by the witness, John H. B. Latrobe, and that he was, at the time of so doing, of sound and disposing mind, and capable of making a valid deed or contract; and shall further find from the evidence in the cause, that the said paper-writing, dated on the 12th of April, 1860, and purporting to be a codicil to his last will and testament, was signed, sealed, published and declared by the said Isaac Tyson, Jr., in the presence of the subscribing witnesses thereto, as and for a codicil to his last will and testament, who, in his presence, signed the same as witnesses thereto, that then the presumption of law is in favor of the validity of said codicil, and that the burden of proof is on the plaintiffs to satisfy the jury that at the time of so doing, the said Isaac Tyson, Jr., was not of sound and disposing mind, and was not capable of executing a valid deed or contract.

2. That if the jury shall find from the evidence in the cause the making and execution of the paper-writing dated on the 12th of April, 1860, purporting to be a codicil to the last will and testament of the said Isaac Tyson, Jr., in the manner set forth in the preceding prayer, that there is no evidence in this cause that the said Isaac Tyson, Jr., was not of sound and disposing mind, and capable of executing a valid deed or contract when he so made and executed the said codicil; and the jury must find for the defendants on the first issue.

3. That there is no evidence in this cause that the said Isaac Tyson Jr., executed the paper-writing dated on the 12th of April, 1860, offered in evidence in this cause, and purporting to be a codicil to his last will and testament, under the influence of suggestions, importunities or misrepresentations, when his mind, from its enfeebled state, was unable to resist the same; and that the jury must find for the defendants on the second issue.

4. That there is evidence in this cause that the paperwriting dated on the 12th of April, 1860, offered in evidence in this cause, and purporting to be a codicil to the last will and testament of Isaac Tyson, Jr., was procured by undue influences, fraudulent devices, importunities, misrepresentations and deceits practiced upon the said Isaac Tyson, Jr., which, under the circumstances, did not leave him free in the disposition of his estate; and that the jury must find for the defendants on the third issue.

5. Identical with No. I, except that it applies to the codicil of the 15th of January, 1861.

6. Same as No. 2, except that it applies to the codicil of the 15th of January, 1861, and requires the jury to find for the defendants on the fourth issue.

7. Same as No. 3, except that it applies to the codicil of the 15th of January, 1861, and requires the jury to find for the defendants on the fifth issue.

8. Same as No. 4, except that it applies to the codicil of the 15th of January, 1861, and requires the jury to find for the defendants on the sixth issue.

9. That there is no evidence in this cause that the said Isaac Tyson, Jr., at any time subsequent to the execution of the said paper-writing dated on the 12th of April, 1860, purporting to be a codicil to his last will and testament, or at any time subsequent to the execution of the paper-writing, dated the 15th of January, 1861, purporting to be a codicil to his last will and testament, was desirous of altering or cancelling the said paperwritings, so purporting to be codicils as aforesaid to his last will and testament, or either of them, except so far as he did alter the same by the codicil made on the 9th of May, 1861, which has been offered in evidence, if the jury shall find the making and execution of the said last named codicil; and that there is no evidence in this cause that the said Isaac Tyson, Jr., was prevented from altering or cancelling the said paper-writing dated on the 12th of April, 1860, purporting to be a codicil to his last will and testament, or the paper-writing dated on the 15th of January, 1861, purporting to be a codicil to his last will and testament, or either of said paper-writings, by management, fraud, undue influence or importunities; and that the jury must find for the defendants on the seventh issue.

The court (Dobbin, J.,) rejected the prayers of the caveators, and granted those of the caveatees. To this action of the court the caveators excepted, and the verdict being against them on all the issues, they appealed.

The cause was argued before BARTOL, C.J., STEWART, BOWIE, ALVEY AND ROBINSON, JJ.

Charles Marshall and William S. Waters, for the appellants, Argued that there was evidence on the part of the caveators, applicable to the issues in the case, which should have been submitted to the jury; and they particularly considered the following issues:

1. Were the codicils in question the result of fraud upon the testator?

2. Were they the result of undue influence?

3. Was the testator of sound mind, capable of executing a valid deed or contract when he made them?

The following legal propositions were maintained:

It is the province of the court to decide questions of law, and of the jury to decide facts. The court may as matter of law decide that there is no evidence for the jury only when the evidence is of such a character that no rational mind could infer from it the fact sought to be established. Although the testimony be weak, yet if it tend to prove the issue, the jury alone can weigh it, and determine its sufficiency. The duty of the court in determining that there is no evidence at the trial, differs from its duty in a motion for a new trial. The court in the first can only determine whether any evidence exists, in the second the evidence must be weighed. Richardson v. Milburn, 17 Md. 67; Fulton v. Maccracken, 18 Md. 528; Plank Road Co. v. Bruce, 6 Md. 464; Cole v. Hebb, 7 G. & J. 27; Davis v. Davis, 7 H. & J. 736.

No matter how strong the weight of testimony may be in favor of any party, if there be any competent testimony on behalf of the other upon which the jury could reasonably find for him it is error for the court to undertake to take that right from them. Charleston Ins. Co. v. Corner, 2 Gill,...