Vance v. Humphreys
Decision Date | 08 May 1922 |
Docket Number | No. 3117.,3117. |
Parties | VANCE v. HUMPHREYS et al. |
Court | Missouri Court of Appeals |
Appeal from Circuit Court, Laclede County; L. B. Woodside, Judge.
Action by W. Vance, administrator of the estate of Lina Vance Goforth, against T. E. Humphreys and another. From judgment for plaintiff, defendants appeal. Affirmed.
Don O. Vernon, of Lebanon, for appellants.
Phil M. Donnelly, of Lebanon, for respondent.
COX, P.
Action on a note and for foreclosure of a deed of trust securing it. Trial by court. Judgment for plaintiff, and defendants have appealed.
The execution of the note and deed of trust were admitted, but failure of consideration pleaded as a defense. The controversy arose out of the following facts: Certain land in Laclede county, Mo., had been conveyed by deed to Jennie A. Humphreys for life with remainder to her bodily heirs. Jennie A. Flumphyeys is still living, but had conceived the idea that she wanted the land divided in her lifetime so there would be no trouble after she was dead. On October 19. 1914, she had four children and one granddaughter a child of a deceased daughter, living. These were the only heirs apparent of her body at that time. Three of the children, to wit, Della Fletcher, Mollie Webb, and T. E. Humphreys, were adults and married. Relda Humphreys and the granddaughter Lina Vance were minors. On October 19, 1914, Jennie A. Humphreys, the three adult children, and the father and grandfather of the minor, Line Vance, who represented her, met at the office of Mr. Kellerman, a lawyer in Lebanon, and Jennie A. Humphreys then inquired of Mr. Kellerman whether a division of the land could be' made. He examined the title and Informed them that the minors could not make deeds that would bind them so that they could not repudiate them when they reached their majorities, and also informed them that Jennie A. Humphreys, the mother, only had a life estate, and the fee was in her bodily heirs, and her bodily heirs that were living at her death would be the persons that would take the land, but that a division could be made that would bind all except the minors, and that, if they did not repudiate it when they became of age, they would be bound also. As a result of this conversation, it was agreed among those present that a division should be made as the mother seems to have wished it. In this division defendant T. E. Humphreys and Lina Vance, one of the minors, was to have the 140 acres described in the deed of trust sought to be foreclosed in this case, but this 140 acres could not well be divided, so it was agreed that T. D. Humphreys should buy the interest of Line, Vance for $500, and, since she was a minor, and they knew she could not make a binding contract at that time, it was agreed for her to sign the deed with the others conveying the land to T. E. Humphreys, and he and his wife would execute a note for $500 payable to her on or before April 18, 1921, when she would reach her majority and secure it by a mortgage on the land. This was done.
The note is as follows:
The deed of trust is in the usual form. To consummate the division of the land, a deed was drawn up by Mr. Kellerman and signed and acknowledged by all the parties and the husbands and wives of those who were married, including both the minors and also D. A. Vance and Wm. L. Vance, the father and grandfather of the minor Lina Vance.
This deed is as follows:
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Byrd v. Allen
...110 Mo. 627, 19 S.W. 979; Godman v. Simmons, 113 Mo. 122, 20 S.W. 972; Clark v. Sires, 193 Mo. 502, 92 S.W. 224; Vance v. Humphreys, 219 Mo. App. 498, 241 S.W. 91; Schee v. Boone, 295 Mo. 212, 243 S.W. 882; Nichols v. Robinson, 277 Mo. 483, 211 S.W. 14; Donaldson v. Donaldson, 311 Mo. 208, ......
-
Davis v. Austin, 37716.
... ... Shee v. Boone, 243 S.W. 882, 295 Mo. 212; Mo. Central Bldg. & Loan Assn. v. Evler, 141 S.W. 877, 237 Mo. 679; Vance v. Humphreys, 241 S.W. 91, 210 Mo. App. 498; Post v. Cavender, 12 Mo. App. 20; Inlow v. Herren, 267 S.W. 893, 306 Mo. 42; Fanning v. Doan, 128 Mo ... ...
-
Mizell v. Osmon, 39376.
...without warranties. Brown v. Fulkerson, 125 Mo. 400, 28 S.W. 632; Godman v. Simmons, 113 Mo. 122, 20 S.W. 972; Vance v. Humphreys, 210 Mo. App. 498, 241 S.W. 91. (20) In the event the court should hold the defendant is not entitled to the full fee simple title in and to all of the lands in ......
-
Mizell v. Osmon
...grantors without warranties. Brown v. Fulkerson, 125 Mo. 400, 28 S.W. 632; Godman v. Simmons, 113 Mo. 122, 20 S.W. 972; Vance v. Humphreys, 210 Mo.App. 498, 241 S.W. 91. (20) In the event the court should hold the defendant is entitled to the full fee simple title in and to all of the lands......