Wickiser v. Cook
| Decision Date | 31 January 1877 |
| Parties | JOHN WICKISERv.MARGARET C. COOK. |
| Court | Illinois Supreme Court |
OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE
APPEAL from the Circuit Court of Cumberland county; the Hon. JAMES C. ALLEN, Judge, presiding.
Messrs. D. T. & D. S. MCINTYRE, for the appellant.
Mr. HIRAM B. DECIUS, for the appellee.
The questions presented by this record involve the consideration of a sale and conveyance of a tract of land by a ward to a guardian a short time after the ward attained majority. The mere fact that the relation of guardian and ward has existed, will not preclude the making of contracts between the two after the guardianship has been closed and the accounts fully and fairly settled. After the fiduciary relation has terminated, and the influences which that relation would necessarily create have ceased to exist, no reason is perceived which would debar the parties from making contracts, which, if fairly and honestly made, based upon an adequate consideration, courts may sanction and sustain.
In Oleler v. Sansborn, 2 Atk. 15, a question of this character arose, and Lord HARDWICK said: In this case it was improper for a guardian to purchase his ward's estate immediately after his arriving of age; but, though it has a suspicious look, yet if he paid the full consideration, it is not voluntary, nor can it be set aside. Perry on Trusts, in discussing the question, (sec. 200,) announces the rule as follows: “While the relation actually subsists, no contracts can be made; but if a contract or conveyance is made by the ward to the guardian, just after attaining his property, and before a full settlement is made, and while the influence of the guardian is in full force, courts will examine it in all its aspects; and the guardian claiming under such a conveyance must satisfy the court that the transaction was fair and proper, and that it did not proceed from undue influence, or from any fear, hope, or any other unworthy motive induced in the mind of the ward by the conduct of the guardian.”
In Reeve's Domestic Relations, p. 475, and note, it is announced, in clear and emphatic terms, that a valid contract may be made between guardian and ward shortly after the ward attains his majority, where it appeared a full consideration had been paid, and no undue influence had been exerted. In the cases which we have had occasion to examine, where contracts of this character have been set aside, it appeared in all of them that some undue influence had been exerted over the ward.
The question then arises, whether the sale in this case was made in conformity to the rule announced in the authorities cited. If it was, it may be sustained; otherwise, not. The appellant was appointed guardian in 1867, but he never made any report of his doings to the county court. In September, 1871, appellee was of age. In June, 1872, she sold appellant the premises. The consideration named in the deed was $1300, but appellee was paid but $600. She was told by appellant that indebtedness amounting to $700 was existing against the land, for which it was liable to be sold. She appeared to rely upon this statement made by her guardian,...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Kosakowski v. Bagdon
... ... McConnel, 17 Ill. 148;Zeigler v. Hughes, 55 Ill. 288;Ward v. Armstrong, 84 Ill. 151; Wickiser v. Cook, 85 Ill. 68). Where a fiduciary relation exists, the person obtaining the advantage must vindicate the bargain or gift from any shadow of ... ...
-
Stagg v. Small
...Hunt v. Rowland, 28 Iowa, 350; Snyder v. Griswold, 37 Ill. 216; Cushman v. Sutphen, 42 Ill. 256; Henderson v. Bellew, 45 Ill. 322; Wickiser v. Cook, 85 Ill. 68; Gibson v. Golds, 27 E. L. & Eq. 596; Mulvey v. Gibbons, 87 Ill. 367; 2 Story's Eq. 693. Appellant is only entitled to insist that ......
-
Gamblin v. Dickson
... ... 139; 6 Pomeroy's Eq. Jur., sec. 688; 6 Cyc. 313; ... Martin v. Martin, 35 Ala. 560; Coffee v ... Newsome, 2 Ga. 442; Wickiser v. Cook, 85 Ill ... 68; McCorkell v. Karhoff, 90 Iowa 545, 58 N.W. 913; ... Thayer v. Knote, 59 Kan. 181, 52 P. 433; Thomas ... v. Beals, 154 ... ...
-
Dowie v. Driscoll
...not proceed from undue influence (Jennings v. McConnel, 17 Ill. 148;Zeigler v. Hughes, 55 Ill. 288;Ward v. Armstrong, 84 Ill. 151;Wickiser v. Cook, 85 Ill. 68). In Sands v. Sands, 112 Ill. 225, on page 232, it was said: ‘The rule is, where a person, enfeebled in mind by disease or old age, ......