Williamson v. Grider
Decision Date | 30 January 1911 |
Citation | 135 S.W. 361,97 Ark. 588 |
Parties | WILLIAMSON v. GRIDER |
Court | Arkansas Supreme Court |
Appeal from Mississippi Chancery Court, Osceola District; Edward D Robertson, Chancellor; reversed in part.
Mrs Sue M. Grider died April 13, 1901, testate. Her will was duly probated, and is as follows:
The property consisted of 5,000 acres of land in Mississippi County, Arkansas, 2,000 of which was cleared and in cultivation. There were mules, wagons and farming implements necessary for the plantation. There were two stocks of merchandise worth $ 4,700. There was also the home in Memphis, where the family lived at the time of her death. The children are Mrs. Georgia Gordon Williamson, born in 1882; Mrs. Josephine G. Mitchell, born in 1886; and John McGavock Grider, born May 28, 1892. The two daughters, appellants, were of age when this suit was brought, and the son, John McGavock, was a minor at the time of the bringing of the suit and also at the time of the decree herein. The property was incumbered by a mortgage to the American Freehold & Mortgage Company for $ 26,000, payable as follows: $ 5,000 January 1, 1902; $ 5,000 January 1, 1903; $ 5,000 January 1, 1904; $ 5,000 January 1, 1905; and $ 6,000 January 1, 1906, all bearing interest at 8 per cent. per annum from date until maturity and 10 per cent. thereafter until paid. The Delta Cotton Company also held a mortgage covering advances to be made during the year 1901, in the sum of $ 13,000. The total indebtedness of the estate amounted to $ 37,976.36.
W. H. Grider had managed his wife's business from the time of their marriage in 1880 till her death. He had cleared large areas of land on the plantation, had built two gin houses, had leased some of the lands, and was cultivating the residue by share croppers. He was doing a general merchandise business and furnishing tenants and croppers plantation supplies from the stores. The money necessary to carry on this business had been advanced from year to year by commission merchants, who were secured by mortgages on the crops, wagons, mules, and farming implements on the plantation. Upon the death of Mrs. Grider, the trustees under the will took charge of the estate. It appears that Mrs. Erwin was an elderly lady, and that the active management of the trust devolved on W. H. Grider. Mrs. Erwin simply acquiesced in what he did. The trustees construed the will as giving them power to manage the estate of Mrs. Sue M. Grider in the way it had been managed by W. H. Grider before her death, and accordingly they continued to so manage it after her death during the remainder of the year 1901, and obtained large advances from the Delta Cotton Company, in addition to the balance due it of an old indebtedness that had been advanced prior to Mrs. Grider's death. These advances were made under the mortgage that had been executed by Mrs. Grider to operate the plantation for the year 1901. But the trustees were unable to make the same arrangements for the year 1902, unless they could obtain from the chancery court a decision holding that they had authority to do so. Therefore at the March term, 1902, W. H. Grider filed a petition in the name of himself and Mrs. Erwin, his co-trustee, and Georgia D. Grider, also Josephine L. Grider and John McGavock Grider, by W. H. Grider, their next friend. After setting out the will, the petition alleged the manner in which the plantation had been operated theretofore, and then set forth that "the trustees would have difficulty in arranging for advances for the purpose of operating the plantation during the existence of the trust, in the usual way that it had been operated, unless it should be construed by the court that they had authority under the will to do so." The petition then continued as follows:
The court, on the allegations of the petitions and the consideration of the provisions of the will, found as follows:
"That the legal title to the estate of Sue M. Grider, deceased, by her last will and testament, passed to the trustees therein, namely, W. H. Grider and Georgia M. Erwin, to be held by them until the debts of said deceased should be paid or her youngest child should reach the age of twenty-one years, and that in the meantime the said trustees should manage and control said plantation and property as in their discretion they thought best; and the court further finds that in the lifetime of the said Sue M. Grider the said plantation was successfully managed and controlled by her husband, Wm. H. Grider; that it was furnished annually by commission merchants, who were secured by a mortgage on stock, crops, and implements, and that it is necessary and expedient that it be operated in the same way for the year 1902."
The court then proceeded to render the following decree:
Thereafter W. H. Grider, as the active trustee, continued to manage and operate the trust estate, submitting the manner of his management and the result of his operations to the chancery court in annual reports. The court accepted these reports, and made further orders concerning the management of the estate. On June 1, 1904, the chancery court entered the following order:
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Stewart Oil Company v. Bryant
...§ 804; 99 Ark. 260; 16 Cyc. 679; 64 Ark. 627; 147 Ark. 555; 21 C. J. p. 1216; § 221; 91 Ark. 141; 35 Ark. 377; 76 Ark. 67; 42 Ark. 473; 97 Ark. 588; Ark. 371; 38 Ark. 419; 81 Ark. 269; 86 Ark. 284; 106 Ark. 568; 102 Ark. 146; 98 Ark. 581; 14 C. J. 630, § 920. Appellees have not met the burd......
-
Burke Construction Co. v. Board of Improvement of Paving District No. 20
...right to apply to a court of equity for aid and direction. 52 Ark. 546; 123 Ark. 258; 101 Ark. 455; 121 Ark. 85; 150 Ark. 63; 4 Ark. 302; 97 Ark. 588; 110 Ark. Moreover, after so much delay, litigation and expense, it is too late to insist on a motion to transfer which was never pressed. It......
-
LeFlore v. Handlin
... ... had jurisdiction to construe the trust. In seeking a ... construction of this will, the practice approved in the case ... of Williamson v. Grider, 97 Ark. 588, 607, ... 135 S.W. 361 et seq., was followed. See also ... Booe v. Vinson, 104 Ark. 439 at 439-444, ... 149 S.W. 524; ... ...
-
Booe v. Vinson
...will not lend its aid merely to construe a will. No equitable rights or estates are sought to be determined. 70 Ark. 432; 80 Ark. 1; 97 Ark. 588. 2. cardinal rule in construing wills is to arrive at the intent of the testator, and if that intent can be clearly ascertained, and is not contra......