Wood v. Wood

• Decision Date: 04 January 1915
• Docket Number: 89
• Citation: 172 S.W. 860,116 Ark. 142
• Parties: WOOD v. WOOD
• Court: Arkansas Supreme Court

172 S.W. 860

116 Ark. 142

WOOD v. WOOD

No. 89

Supreme Court of Arkansas

January 4, 1915

Appeal from Sevier Chancery Court; James D. Shaver, Chancellor reversed.

STATEMENT BY THE COURT.

This suit was instituted by the appellant against the appellee for alimony. She alleged that she was married to the appellee June 18, 1900, and that they lived together as husband and wife until December 15, 1912, when the appellee, without cause, abandoned her, and that he had failed to support her that he had considerable money and property, which she set forth in her complaint.

The appellee answered, admitting the marriage. He denied that he abandoned appellant without cause; denied that he had failed to support her, and, by way of cross complaint, alleged that appellant had abandoned him, "that she was of a jealous and nagging disposition, such as rendered his life intolerable, and accused him of trying to poison her, and had unjustly accused him of adultery; that he had purchased a certain tract of land, which he described, but on account of being on bad terms with his neighbors, had the deed made to the appellant; that before their marriage he had furnished appellant money to file a donation claim to a certain other tract, which he described, and that after their marriage appellee, with his own means, had improved the latter tract to the extent of $ 500; that the appellant, knowing that these lands were not her own, and in consideration of the labor and money expended by appellee in improving the same had executed and delivered to him a deed to an undivided one-half interest therein; that the deed had been lost or mislaid and was never recorded. He prayed for a divorce, and that title be vested in him to one-half of the lands, and other relief.

The appellant testified that she owned 215 acres of land in Little River County, of which she bought fifteen acres outright from the State, and donated 120 acres more, and bought eighty acres from one Ed. Dollarhide. She testified that the defendant did not furnish any of the money with which to purchase this land. Stated that she and her brother borrowed the money with which to buy fifteen acres and to donate 120 acres of the land. The Dollarhide tract of eighty acres was purchased with money which she obtained by selling the interest which she had inherited from the Gillihan estate.

She testified that before her marriage to the appellee, she hired him to improve the land. "He worked for me at $ 19 per month for ten or twelve months, improving the property. At the same time I hired several other parties, and all were paid out of the timber." Appellant then exhibited in evidence nine receipts signed by the appellee. She explained that she paid the parties, including the appellee, and took receipts from them showing payments for the work done by them during separate months in the years 1898 and 1899. One of the receipts recited that it was for $ 16, the balance due for two months' work, dated August 29, 1898. The other receipts, eight in number, were for $ 19 each, for separate months of 1898 and 1899, which are designated. She also exhibited, in this connection, seven receipts signed by one Riddle for work done during the years 1898 and 1899 for $ 15 each for the separate months designated, and also two receipts from one Seastrunk, and one from James Black, for work done during the year 1900, for the months designated in the receipts. She stated, in this connection: "I paid these men from the sale of timber. I got $ 603 from the Hempstead County Bank for timber before our marriage. I had a statement thereof in my satchel until yesterday, when I fainted, and it has disappeared. " She further testified: "Wood put no improvements on the land before our marriage that he did not receive pay for."

Concerning the making of a deed by her to appellee for a one-half interest in the land, she testified as follows: "I did make a deed to Wood for one-half interest in my land. We were not getting along well together, he was threatening to leave me, that my health was poor; I was not able to work and make my living, and I could not rent the land for enough to keep me up, and I made a deed with the understanding that I was to hold the deed as long as I lived, and in case I should die without leaving him a child to inherit the land, he was to have a half interest in it, and was to live with me and support me as long as I lived. He was not to have the deed until my death. I never delivered the deed to him; afterward he quit me, and I destroyed the deed, and I never intended that Mr. Wood should have any deed or title to this land until my death; that was the understanding."

In this connection, the record shows the following:

Q. After the deed was acknowledged, what did you do with it?

A. I put it in my trunk, locked it up and kept it.

Q. Did he ever receive this deed from you?

A. No sir; he tried to take it, but I would not let him have it after he deserted me.

Q. How did he try to get it?

A. He tried to file the lock off the trunk.

Q. How did you prevent him?

A. Striking at him with a knife; he slapped my jaws, and I struck at him with a knife.

Q. What did he say he wanted with the deed?

A. He said he did not want the deed, but I knew he did.

Q. Why did you destroy the deed?

A. Because he had not complied with his request. He had left me and he was not entitled to it.

Q. Did he ever pay you anything to get this deed executed?

A. No, sir; not one cent; it was never the understanding that he was to pay me anything.

Appellant testified that appellee had tried to destroy the receipts and other papers in evidence, but that she had hid them and that appellee did not know until the day she was testifying that he had not succeeded in destroying the papers. She stated, in answer to a question, that she knew the deed had never been delivered to the appellee, because she had never delivered it.

Witness C. W. Wright corroborated the testimony of the appellant as to the purchase of her interest in the Gillihan land, for which he paid $ 100, and that part of this money was paid on the Dollarhide land. This witness also testified that he bought timber of Mrs. Wood, which amounted to $ 199.63, and stated that the timber taken from the land would have more than paid for the improvements put on it before he purchased the remaining timber. He further stated that before the parties were married, that the appellee had no property that witness knew of, and that the parties traded with witness.

Appellee testified in his own behalf, in part, as follows: "When we were married, wife had a one-fourth interest in her father's estate and a deed to 15.87 acres I bought in her name in 1897; we were engaged at the time; she urged me to get the land before her brother and Jones got it; I told her if she could borrow the money to file, to go ahead and borrow it and file, and I could pay it back; she borrowed the money of I. B. Wright, and I gave her the money to pay him; in 1903 we sold her inheritance for $ 100, and I applied $ 50 of that money on the purchase of the Dollarhide land and gave my note for $ 75, which I paid myself. It was always understood, if anything came up, we were to divide the land equally; had title to Dollarhide eighty put in her name on account of having had some trouble with my neighbors. I put all improvements that were made on this land. Before we were married, I built a house, cleared six acres, and since then have built a house on the donation and cleared eight or ten acres and fenced same; in fact, put all improvements there except one shanty and about three acres of deadening; think improvements done by me worth $ 900; that most rent in any one year received by me is $ 76. Mrs. Wood did make me a deed to one-half interest in the 215 acres of land. It was always understood between us that I was to have one-half interest in our home. I was to have this one-half interest for doing the work and making the improvements and paying the $ 75 on Dollarhide tract. The deed was delivered to me in her presence at Wilton; I took it and put it in my trunk which I kept locked; she had a key to it and it stayed there until we moved to Mena, and I neglected to have it recorded. While at Mena, and shortly after she had a spell of sickness there, I looked for the deed, and could not find it, and asked her and she said that she had fixed it so it would never do me any good, that she had burned it up."

Further on he stated: "I did not work for Mrs. Wood for wages; she donated the 120 acres before we married; wife had no money and did not receive $ 600 in June before our marriage. At the time she made deed to me, I thought it best on account of her being jealous and cranky, and there being an understanding I was to have half thereof; I asked her, saying it was time, so that if anything happened to either one of us, our brothers could not step in and take it away from the other, and she thought it was."

He denied that he had threatened to quit her if she did not make the deed; said he did not ask her for a deed when they had separated before, thinking she would come back. Said a consideration of $ 5 was named in the deed, and it was paid. He made no promise to live with her at the time, and did not contemplate leaving her. Said Mrs. Wood never employed him and never gave him a cent. Denied that he had tried to destroy any receipts given her by burning them.

Further on, he says: "I insisted on my wife making deed because she would take cranky spells, and I was afraid she would get mad and go sell the place or timber off of it, as she did once before." Appellee had between $ 50 and $ 100 in cash when he married appellant.

After appellant had testified that she had hired appellee to do work...