Webb v. Webb

• Decision Date: 19 January 1914
• Citation: 163 S.W. 1167
• Parties: WEBB et al. v. WEBB.
• Court: Arkansas Supreme Court

163 S.W. 1167

WEBB et al. v. WEBB.

Supreme Court of Arkansas.

January 19, 1914.

Appeal from Sebastian Chancery Court; J. V. Bourland, Chancellor.

Suit by Annie Louise Webb against Mary Elizabeth Webb and others. From a decree for complainant, defendants appeal. Reversed and remanded, with directions.

This suit was brought by appellee in the Sebastian chancery court for the Ft. Smith district against appellants to set aside certain deeds executed between the parties in the division of the estate of one Charles Webb, deceased, the husband of the appellee, and the son and brother of the appellants. Appellee set up, in short, that the deeds which she sought to set aside were all executed through fraud practiced upon her by the appellants, and through and under a misapprehension by her of her rights in the premises. She alleged that she was the owner of the real estate involved under the following will:

"In the name of God, Amen: I, Charles Webb, being of sound mind and good health, do hereby declare this to be my last will and testament, and it is my desire that this will be carried out to the letter.

"To Miss Louise Jannett, my affianced wife, and one that has been my friend when every one else has turned me down, I give all my personal property consisting of whatever moneys I possess, horses, buggies, clothes, furniture and whatever other property I may have, including the insurance policy for one thousand dollars, I now hold in the Fraternal Home, headquarters at Hannibal, Mo., and it is my desire that the Noble Grand of Fort Smith Lodge 19, I. O. O. F. see that this policy is collected with the least expense possible, and paid to the above mentioned Louise Jannett.

"Whatever property I may have coming to me from my father and mother's estate at Ashville, N. C. I want my sister Estell to have to do with as she may deem best.

                "Given under my hand this 30th day of
                November, 1902.         Chas. Webb."
                

She set out in detail the acts constituting the alleged fraud practiced upon her, which it is unnecessary to specify here.

The appellants, in their answer, denied specifically the allegations of fraud against them, and set up, in substance, that after the death of Charles Webb it was ascertained by the respective parties to this litigation that Webb had executed the will above set forth; "that legal advice was sought as to the rights of the plaintiff, and the rights of the mother and brothers and sisters of the deceased under said will, and under the law, and as fully as defendants were advised of these matters the plaintiff was also advised; that, among other things, plaintiff was advised that she could not hold all of said real estate under said will; that under the law the mother and brothers and sisters of deceased would be entitled to one-half of it; * * * and, after these matters had been gone over and fully discussed, * * * it was agreed between the plaintiff and defendants that she should take all the personal property, including the insurance referred to in said will, and that the real estate should be divided between plaintiff and defendants, and, after discussing the matter fully, said division of the real estate was agreed upon, and mutual deeds were executed between the parties for the considerations expressed in said deeds, and for the purpose of enabling each party to convey and make good title in the event either party desired to make a sale of any of said property; that said transaction was fully understood and entirely satisfactory both to the plaintiff and the defendants; that plaintiff expressed herself as being pleased with the settlement of the estate, and requested that the same be filed for record for her at her expense, and the same was accordingly done." The prayer of the answer was that the settlement as thus made be in all things sustained.

The court sustained a demurrer to the answer, and the appellants (defendants) declined to plead further. The court found that appellee, under the will set up in the complaint, was the owner of the property in controversy, and that the deeds sought to be canceled were obtained through fraud, and without consideration, and proceeded to set aside the conveyances executed in pursuance of the alleged settlement, thereby granting to the appellee the relief sought in her complaint. The appellants duly prosecute this appeal.

T. S. Osborne and Read & McDonough, all of Ft. Smith, for appellants. Geo. W. Dodd and Prentiss E. Rowe, both of Ft. Smith, for appellee.

WOOD, J. (after stating the facts as above).

Counsel for appellee are correct in saying that the decision of this case turns upon the construction of the will. This court early announced that "the leading rule in the construction of wills is to give effect to what appears to be the intention of the testator in view of all the provisions of the will." See Campbell v. Campbell, 13 Ark. 513-518; Cockrill v. Armstrong, 31 Ark. 580; Bloom v. Strauss, 73 Ark. 56, 84 S. W. 511; Galloway v. Darby, 105 Ark. 558, 151 S. W. 1014, 44 L. R. A. (N. S.) 782. See, also, 40 Cyc. 1386; 1 Jarman on Wills, 33 and note; 30 E. & A. Ency. Law (2d Ed.) 661.

Lord Coke once observed: "Wills and the construction of them do more to perplex a man than any other learning." "But," he adds, "I have learned this good rule, always to judge in such cases as near as may be, according to the rules of law, and in so doing I shall not err; and this is a good and sure rule, if a will be plain, then to collect the meaning of the testator out of the words of the will." 2 Bulstrode, Reps. 130.

Mr. Jarman, in his excellent work on Wills, says: "Though the intention of testators, when ascertained, is implicitly obeyed, however informal the language in which it may have been conveyed, yet the courts, in construing that language, resort to certain established rules by which particular words and expressions, standing unexplained, have obtained a definite meaning, which meaning, it must be confessed, does not always quadrate with...