Willis B. Child, Harriet Child Crysler, And Charles S. Crysler v. Charles E. Pinney, Guardian of Louisa B. Drake.' (Two Cases)

• Decision Date: 27 July 1908
• Citation: 70 A. 566,81 Vt. 314
• Parties: WILLIS B. CHILD, HARRIET CHILD CRYSLER, AND CHARLES S. CRYSLER v. CHARLES E. PINNEY, GUARDIAN OF LOUISA B. DRAKE.' (Two Cases)
• Court: Vermont Supreme Court

70 A. 566

81 Vt. 314

WILLIS B. CHILD, HARRIET CHILD CRYSLER, AND CHARLES S. CRYSLER v. CHARLES E. PINNEY, GUARDIAN OF LOUISA B. DRAKE.' (Two Cases)

Supreme Court of Vermont

July 27, 1908

May Term, 1908.

APPEAL IN CHANCERY, two cases.Heard on the pleadings and master's joint report at the June Term, 1907, Addison County, Taylor, Chancellor.Decree dismissing the bills with costs.The orators appealed.The parties in each suit are the same.

Decrees affirmed and causes remanded.

Charles S. Crysler, and Senter & Senter for the orators.

Present ROWELL, C. J., TYLER, MUNSON, and WATSON, JJ.

OPINION

WATSON

The two deeds in question were executed by H. Emily Bowditch, who died November 2, 1899.The orator Willis B. Child is her nephew, and the oratrix Harriet Child Crysler is her niece and those two are her next of kin and heirs at law.The orator Charles S. Crysler is the husband of said Harriet.Louisa B. Drake is a cousin of said H. Emily, and defendantRollin L. Shaw was her nephew by marriage, and since this suit began has become the husband of said Louisa B.

The master reported that in June, 1899, said H. Emily Bowditch was afflicted with what proved to be a cancer; that when she learned the nature of her disease she"was desirous and anxious that all arrangements and papers be made which were required to have the property she possessed go to the parties whom she wished to have it; and thereupon matters were talked over between her and Louisa B. Drake, and it was decided that the papers should be made so that the survivor should have all the property the other should own at her death."In pursuance of this arrangement, on Sept. 8 1899, H. Emily Bowditch and Louisa B. Drake each executed and delivered to the other a warranty deed of certain real and personal estate in the town of Weybridge, Vermont, all of which, except about 60 acres of land owned by H. Emily, was owned by them in common.H. Emily's interest in said property was then worth about $ 5,000, and was all the property that she owned.In each deed, the usual covenants of warranty concluded with this clause: "Provided nevertheless, that if I, the grantor, survive said grantee, shall be void and of no effect in law or equity, otherwise in full force and effect."

It is said deed from H.Emily that is sought to be set aside in one of the suits.It is found that "said deeds were made and delivered in exact accordance with the desires of"the parties thereto; that said H.Emily "was fully aware of the effect thereof, and knew perfectly well what would be the result of the execution and delivery of the deed signed by her"; that "she had given the matter full and fair consideration and executed the deed freely and of her own accord, without influence or suggestion from any one, and without any fraud, flattery, or imposition whatever" that till the very last of October, 1899, she"was a capable, strong-minded business woman," and "to a large extent dominated and controlled the said Louisa B.": that after 1878 those two "lived together during all the time, occupying the same sleeping room, were very fond of each other, and almost inseparable"; that said H.Emily "cared more for her cousin and long time companion, Louisa B. Drake, than for any and all other persons," and had become so solicitous about her welfare that she desired her to have all of which the said H.Emily might die possessed; that during the last years of...