Yocum v. Taylor

• Decision Date: 14 March 1917
• Docket Number: 31391
• Parties: MARIE YOCUM, Appellant, v. WILLIAM TAYLOR, Administrator, Appellee
• Court: Iowa Supreme Court

161 N.W. 636

179 Iowa 695

MARIE YOCUM, Appellant, v. WILLIAM TAYLOR, Administrator, Appellee

No. 31391

Supreme Court of Iowa, Des Moines

March 14, 1917

Appeal from Clarke District Court.--THOMAS L. MAXWELL, Judge.

SUIT in equity to set aside a judgment of the district court of Clarke County, in an action of replevin brought by defendant against the plaintiff herein. The trial court sustained a demurrer to the petition as amended, and plaintiff appeals.

Affirmed.

Mason & Dyer, for appellant.

O. M Slaymaker, for appellee.

DEEMER J. GAYNOR, C. J., LADD, EVANS and PRESTON, JJ., concur.

OPINION

DEEMER, J.

I.

This is an independent action in equity, to set aside a judgment of the district court, in a replevin case brought by defendant against the plaintiff. The property involved was a certificate of deposit for the sum of $ 2,500, issued by the Murray Bank to one T. W. Husted, now deceased. The property was seized on a writ of replevin issued in that case, and turned over to the defendant herein, the administrator of Husted. Plaintiff herein made no defense to that action, and the judgment was rendered on the 9th day of February, 1915, due notice having been given plaintiff herein of the action.

This suit in equity was commenced October 5th, 1915. It is not to set aside the default, or to vacate and set aside the judgment under Section 4091 et seq. of the Code, but, as stated, an independent action in equity to set aside the judgment. The grounds for setting aside the judgment are duress, or fraud and duress, the allegations, so far as material, being as follows:

"That, immediately after the death of the said T. W. Husted, Boyd Husted, brother of the deceased, Earl and Gale, sons of the deceased, accused this plaintiff of having poisoned the said T. W. Husted, their brother and father, and of having caused his death. That the said parties, each and all, not only accused her of murder as aforesaid, but accused her of being guilty of the crime of bigamy, and did endeavor to have her arrested and charged with these said crimes. That the parties herein named assiduously circulated said false and slanderous reports in the neighborhood of the Husted farm where she lived, and they forced and compelled her, the plaintiff herein, to leave said farm, and she left said farm with only 40 cents in money, and came to the city of Osceola without means and without friends. And this plaintiff states further that for three days she subsisted in the said city of Osceola on 5 cents in money. That the circulation of these said false and slanderous reports alienated and drove from her all of the friends and acquaintances she had made. That she was a stranger, with no one to consult and no one to go to for advice and sympathy. And that during this time, when in these straitened financial and unfriendly circumstances, she was served, as she is now informed and believes, with the writ of replevin. That at the time she did not know that the person serving the same was a sheriff or other officer. That she supposed and believed that he was an agent of the administrator, his agents, or attorneys, or some member of the Husted family. That said person said to her that if she did not deliver up said certificate she would be arrested, thrown into jail, which said threat she construed to mean that she would be arrested on account of the charges that were being made and had been made. And this plaintiff states that she was in great fear of being arrested. That she was suffering under great mental anguish and had not recovered from the physical depression incident to the attendance upon T. W. Husted's last illness, and that, under these circumstances, in order to avoid arrest under the charge of murder or under the charge of bigamy, she delivered the said certificate of deposit. But this plaintiff states that she did not know that it was recovered from her by due process of law. Plaintiff further alleges in this connection that she was led to believe and did believe that, in the event there was a surrender of this certificate, that the said charges would not be pressed against her in her then helpless condition, and so relying surrendered the same.

"Plaintiff further states that she did not know and understand that there was any suit pending against her in connection with this certificate. Nor did she know it was necessary for her to appear and make defense at the term of court when this judgment was rendered against her. That she still stood in great fear of criminal prosecution under the charges of murder and bigamy. That she had not consulted counsel and feared to consult counsel, lest in her activity she stir up the defendants, who would procure, or seek to procure, her indictment and trial for the defense of the charges aforesaid. And in this connection, plaintiff further states that she was without means and had no acquaintance among attorneys and no means for employment of attorneys. Plaintiff further states that the conditions and circumstances herein described remained unchanged until a long time after the ensuing term of court had convened and adjourned. That on or about Wednesday, December 8, 1914, at Osceola, Iowa, one A. B. Miller, who was a member of the bar of said court, presented to the plaintiff a paper which is in words and figures following, to wit: 'In the district court of Iowa in and for Clarke County. November term, 1914. In the matter of the estate of T. W. Husted, deceased. This is to show and certify that I was married to J. L. Yocum prior to the time I married T. W. Husted, late of Clarke County, Iowa, and that I was not divorced from the said J. L. Yocum, and that he is still living. Dated at Osceola, Iowa, this 8th day of December, 1914. Witnesses.' That said Miller represented to plaintiff that he was the attorney for the heirs of the said T. W. Husted, deceased; that they desired an immediate appointment of an administrator of the said T. W. Husted, and that if the plaintiff would sign the said paper so presented, that the charge of murder of the said T. W. Husted would not be pressed against the plaintiff, which said statement by the said A. B. Miller so made put the plaintiff in great fear and consternation, but the plaintiff declined to sign the same."

The demurrer was the general one...