Weller v. Collier
| Decision Date | 05 January 1918 |
| Docket Number | No. 18821.,18821. |
| Parties | WELLER v. COLLIER et al. |
| Court | Missouri Supreme Court |
Appeal from Circuit Court, Maries County; J. G. Slate, Judge.
Suit by Mary A. Weller against Josephine Collier and husband. Judgment for defendants, and plaintiff appeals. Reversed and remanded, with directions.
Pope & Terrill, of Vienna, and J. W. Hensley, of Owensville, for appellant. J. Ellis Walker, of Rolla, for respondents.
Plaintiff brought this suit as the widow of Jacob J. Weller, deceased, to set aside a conveyance of a farm, made by said Weller in his lifetime to the defendant Josephine Collier, his daughter by a former marriage; the petition alleging that the deed was made in fraud of defendant's right of dower in the property conveyed.
The plaintiff became engaged to marry Jacob J. Weller in June, 1911, and the marriage took place on March 21, 1912. Plaintiff was 27 or 28 years old, and Weller was about 55 years of age. At that time Weller was suffering from a loathsome disease, of which plaintiff was ignorant, and his death took place on April 22, 1913. Sixteen days before the marriage, on March 5, 1912, he conveyed the land in dispute to his daughter, the defendant Josephine Collier, for the expressed consideration of "one dollar and other valuable considerations." Before the marriage he told his prospective wife about the farm, as she testified without objection. She knew nothing about the conveyance to his daughter. After his marriage he lived on the property with his wife until he died. He cultivated it during the year 1912, a short time before his death leased it for the year 1913, paid the taxes on it in the year 1912, and died leaving his widow in possession of it.
Several letters were introduced, written by Weller to plaintiff during their engagement, in which he described his farm, told about building a house on it, and getting it ready for occupancy, and urged her to come and see it. In one of these letters he perpetrated this bluff:
"But if you like that other fellow Better than me go after him for I don't got 2 farms, I have Only One."
About three weeks before the marriage he sought advice from a witness, Gus Wallace, as to whether he could make a deed to the land and not have the deed recorded. He stated at the time that he wanted to make a deed to Josephine Collier and fix it so that in case he should marry, Josephine would have the property at his death. He talked to one McKinney, apparently a friend of his, and told him that if he got married he wanted to do certain things for his children; that he was going to get married and he was going to make a change in regard to his property, and afterwards told the witness he did make a change, and that he was going to "set things aside" with a view to his marriage until he found out whether the prospective wife would be good to him or not, and in that connection told about making the deed conveying his property to Josephine Collier. Other witnesses testified to statements made by him expressing his desire that Josephine should have the property he should leave at his death.
On one occasion after the marriage the plaintiff, having heard that Weller had made a will in favor of Josephine Collier, asked him about it, and he swore it was a lie and the meddling of people in his business. Mary Schwartz, the grandmother of Josephine Collier testified that she had a talk with Josephine in October, 1912, in which she said to Josephine she had heard that her father had willed her everything, but Josephine, with apparent knowledge of what he had done, said that it was for all of them, herself and her brothers and sisters. This conversation took place at a time, it appears, when Weller had gone down to St. Louis to consult a doctor.
The defendant introduced evidence to show that Weller had made statements explaining why he had conveyed the property to Josephine, which were to the effect that it was because the other children would not take care of him or stay with him, and because Josephine was the only one of his children who cared for him. In those statements he did not mention any specific thing she had done for him which would amount to a valuable consideration. Evidently they were offered for the purpose of showing good faith. This evidence was objected to and exception duly saved to the ruling in admitting it. No evidence was offered from any other source to show a consideration for deed, or that Josephine had done anything for him except to visit him occasionally.
The judgment was for the defendants, and the plaintiff appealed.
I. The admission of evidence offered by defendant of statements of the decedent to show his purpose in making...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Wahl v. Wahl
...99, 67 S.W. 605; Dyer v. Smith, 62 Mo. App. 606; Headington v. Woodard, 214 S.W. 963; Hach v. Rollins, 158 Mo. 182, 59 S.W. 232; Weller v. Collier, 199 S.W. 974; Merz v. The Bank, 130 S.W. (2d) 611, 344 Mo. Maddox & Maddox, Stephen Barton and Jack Manhein for respondents. (1) Title to corpo......
-
Bernblum v. Travelers Ins. Co., 34440.
...and hearsay. Brown v. Pac. Mut. Life Ins. Co., 109 Mo. App. 137, 82 S.W. 1122; Perry's Admr. v. Roberts, 17 Mo. 36; Weller v. Collier, 199 S.W. 974; Townsend v. Schaden, 275 Mo. 227, 204 S.W. 1076; Tuite v. Supreme Forest, Woodmen's Circle, 193 Mo. App. 619, 187 S.W. 137; Dodge v. Freedman'......
-
Merz v. Tower Grove Bank & Trust Co., 35769.
...transaction as will cover plaintiff's interest. It may restore the status quo. [Vordick v. Kirsch (Mo.), 216 S.W. 519; Weller v. Collier, 199 S.W. 974.] There is the further rule that equity having once acquired jurisdiction, will retain it, under a prayer for general relief, to administer ......
-
Wahl v. Wahl
... ... 605; Dyer v. Smith, 62 Mo.App. 606; ... Headington v. Woodard, 214 S.W. 963; Hach v ... Rollins, 158 Mo. 182, 59 S.W. 232; Weller v ... Collier, 199 S.W. 974; Merz v. The Bank, 130 S.W.2d 611, ... 344 Mo. 1150 ... Maddox & Maddox, Stephen Barton and ... ...