Wright v. Green
| Decision Date | 06 February 1912 |
| Citation | 144 S.W. 437,239 Mo. 449 |
| Parties | JAMES H. WRIGHT v. WILLIAM S. GREEN, Appellant |
| Court | Missouri Supreme Court |
Appeal from Pike Circuit Court. -- Hon. David H. Eby, Judge.
Affirmed.
W. O Gray and Dempsey & McGinnis for appellant.
(1) Atkinson had no interest in the land since his indebtedness to the estate of Gertie M. Chamberlain exceeded what would have been his share in said estate. Leitman v Leitman, 149 Mo. 112; Ayres v. King, 168 Mo 244; Trabue v. Henderson, 180 Mo. 625; Duffy v. Duffy, 155 Mo. 144. (2) Appellant was an innocent purchaser for value without notice and was in possession under his contract for the purchase of land in controversy before respondent pretended to buy it. Young v. Montgomery, 28 Mo. 604; Price v. Hart, 29 Mo. 171; Cockrell v. McIntyre, 161 Mo. 59; Section 67, Bankrupt Act of 1898. (3) Respondent's tender in a proper case would be effective only in respect to interest and damages. R. S. 1899, secs. 1564 and 1565. The trustee in bankruptcy took no better title to the property of the Chamberlain estate than Atkinson had therein. Yeatman v. Savings Institution, 95 U.S. 764; Stewart v. Platt, 101 U.S. 731; Humphrey v. Yeatman, 198 U.S. 91; Hiscock v. Varick Bank, 206 U.S. 38. (4) Atkinson being insolvent when he became administrator of the Chamberlain estate his indebtedness did not become assets. McCarty v. Frazier, 62 Mo. 263.
J. D. Hostetter and Tapley & Fitzgerrell for respondent.
(1) Atkinson's interest in the estate amounted to more than he owed the estate. (2) Appellant was not an innocent purchaser. He purchased from Atkinson, the bankrupt, and accepted a deed from Atkinson and wife to the land in controversy and before any money was paid or anything done the appellant was notified that the respondent claimed to have bought the interest of Atkinson in the land and would get a deed for same as soon as the trustee was ordered to make it. (3) The tender of the respondent to appellant of the amount of the two notes Atkinson owed the Cham berlain estate and the refusal of Atkinson, as administrator, to accept the same, shows conclusively that Atkinson himself knew that his interest in the estate amounted to more than he owed the estate.
This is a suit under section 2535, Revised Statutes 1909, to ascertain and determine the title to a one-tenth interest in the southeast quarter of the southwest quarter of section fifteen, and north half of the north half of the southeast quarter of the southeast quarter of section sixteen, all in township fifty-two, range four, west, in Pike county, Missouri.
The facts are that Gertie Chamberlain was the owner of the land described and she died intestate April 25, 1905, leaving as her only heirs her father Samuel T. Atkinson, mother, and brothers and sisters (or their representatives) to the number of eight, ten different persons apparently being entitled to participate in the distribution of the estate. The father, Samuel T. Atkinson, was appointed administrator. He was insolvent and indebted to Gertie Chamberlain at her death in the sum of $ 126, augmented by interest to about $ 136 at the time of the trial. The decedent's estate consisted of one hundred acres of land, including that in suit, cash in the amount of $ 68.95, notes inventoried at $ 167.50, and household goods out of which $ 57.75 had been realized. Demands aggregating $ 271.50 had been paid, including a total of $ 38.13 for probate fees, attorney's fees and administrator's commission. Of this amount the administrator paid $ 134.80 out of his own funds. The notes inventoried were those executed by him and two signed by another distributee.
The value of the land was a much mooted question. Witnesses variously estimated it at from $ 12 to $ 15 per acre.
In October, 1905, Samuel T. Atkinson was, in the Federal court at Hannibal, Missouri, duly adjudged bankrupt, his interest in his deceased daughter's land, including the land in suit, was duly sold by the trustee by order of the court having jurisdiction of the bankrupt's estate, and respondent became the purchaser, receiving his deed in January, 1906.
Evidence for appellant tended to show that in the summer of 1905 he made some sort of an agreement to purchase from the administrator or heirs of Gertie Chamberlain the land in suit at $ 15 per acre, and that in August or September he filled some ditches and plowed about twenty acres. He had actual notice in October or November, 1905, of the proceedings in bankruptcy and that the land in suit would be affected thereby. In January, 1906, he accepted deeds from the heirs, including Samuel T. Atkinson, paying therefor the purchase price of $ 15 per acre except one-tenth thereof, which he retained and had at the time of trial.
Respondent tendered the amount of Samuel T. Atkinson's indebtedness to the Chamberlain estate to Samuel T. Atkinson as administrator and renewed that tender in his reply filed in this case, but did not deposit the money in court.
The trial court adjudged respondent to be the owner of a one-tenth interest in the land and defendant to be the owner of the other nine-tenths subject to a mortgage he had executed.
The evidence was not...
To continue reading
Request your trial