Wolff v. Bluhm

• Decision Date: 02 February 1897
• Citation: 70 N.W. 73,95 Wis. 257
• Parties: WOLFF v. BLUHM ET AL.
• Court: Wisconsin Supreme Court

95 Wis. 257

70 N.W. 73

WOLFF

v.BLUHM ET AL.

Supreme Court of Wisconsin.

Feb. 2, 1897.

Appeal from circuit court, Sheboygan county; N. S. Gilson, Judge.

Action by August Wolff, trustee, against Gottfried Bluhm and another, to foreclose a mortgage. From a judgment for defendants, plaintiff appeals. Reversed.

Defendants, Gottfried Bluhm and Eliza Bluhm, were husband and wife. Gottfried Bluhm was charged by the father of one Ida Nell, a young girl of the age of 15 years, and unmarried, with being the father of a child with which she was pregnant. For the purpose of providing for the care of the girl and of the child, Gottfried Bluhm executed and delivered to August Wolff, as trustee, a note dated June 21, 1894, for $300, payable in installments, and to secure the payment of the same the Bluhms executed and delivered to such trustee a real-estate mortgage. The maker failed to pay the note according to its terms, and thereupon this action was brought to foreclose the mortgage. An answer was interposed to the effect that the note and mortgage were obtained by duress and void on that account. The case turned on the truth of the allegations of the answer, in that regard. The court found in favor of the defendants. The court further found that Gottfried Bluhm was the father of the child of Ida Nell, and that such fact constituted a good consideration for the note and mortgage, but that the same were void because of the manner in which they were obtained. Proper exceptions were filed to preserve for review the questions treated in the opinion. Judgment was entered canceling the note and mortgage, and for costs in favor of the defendants, and from such judgment this appeal was taken.

Simon Gillen and Martin Hughes, for appellant.

M. C. Mead and C. H. Maynard, for respondents.

MARSHALL, J. (after stating the facts).

The sole question here is, does the evidence warrant the finding that the note and mortgage were obtained by duress? That Gottfried Bluhm was the father of the child with which the girl, Ida Nell, was pregnant, that he was so charged, and was threatened with criminal prosecution unless he gave such note and mortgage to provide for the care of the girl and the child, and that he complied with such demand, appears by the findings, and is well supported by the evidence; yet all this does not necessarily constitute duress. The evidence shows that William Nell, the father of the girl, went to Bluhm's house, June 17, 1894, and accused the latter of having been intimate with his daughter, and demanded $500 to settle the matter, stating that unless such sum was paid he (Bluhm) would be sent to Waupun; that Bluhm, the same day, talked the matter over with the girl and her father; that she would not say anything about it; that Nell, after seeing Joseph Klahn, proposed to Bluhm...