Younkin v. Younkin

• Decision Date: 05 April 1895
• Docket Number: 5600
• Parties: EUGENE YOUNKIN, ADMINISTRATOR, APPELLEE, v. HOWARD YOUNKIN, APPELLANT
• Court: Nebraska Supreme Court

63 N.W. 31

44 Neb. 729

EUGENE YOUNKIN, ADMINISTRATOR, APPELLEE, v. HOWARD YOUNKIN, APPELLANT

No. 5600

Supreme Court of Nebraska

April 5, 1895

APPEAL from the district court of Saline county. Heard below before HASTINGS, J.

AFFIRMED.

F. I Foss, for appellant.

Halleck F. Rose and M. H. Fleming, contra.

OPINION

IRVINE, C.

This action was originally commenced by Eva M. Gillaspie against Howard Younkin, her son, alleging that during her son's minority she had purchased a farm in Saline county and procured the title to be taken in the name of the defendant for the sole purpose of preventing her second husband, Gillaspie, from whom she was then separated, from asserting any interest therein; that she had made improvements upon the farm and placed certain personal property thereon; that she removed with her family, including the defendant, to said farm; that the defendant refused to convey the farm to her or to account to her for the personal property thereon; that she had been compelled to remove therefrom, leaving him in possession. She offered to pay the reasonable value of his services upon the farm since his majority, and prayed for a conveyance and an accounting. To this petition an answer was filed placing the material allegations in issue. There was a trial before Morris, J., resulting in a decree finding substantially for the plaintiff, decreeing a conveyance to her, and referring the case for an accounting between the parties. There has been no appeal from this decree, but subsequently thereto the plaintiff executed a lease of the farm to the defendant under an agreement that if on the accounting anything should be found due from the plaintiff to the defendant, then the rent should be applied in payment thereof. The order of reference was afterwards set aside and an accounting had before Hastings, J., who found due the defendant on account of services and for advancements made by him $ 1,261.60; that there was left in the hands of the defendant property of the plaintiff to the value of $ 969.50; that there was due for rent $ 320, leaving a balance in favor of the plaintiff of $ 27.90, for which judgment was entered. Pending these supplemental proceedings the plaintiff had died and the action was revived in the name of the administrator, who appeals from this decree.

It is claimed by the appellant that the court restricted the accounting to too narrow a field and should have admitted certain evidence which was rejected. One...