No. 17,829 | Neb. | Dec 4, 1914
The defendant Henry F. Wilson, with the other defendants, appeals from a decree of the district court for Otoe county, entered August 31, 1912. On the 1st day of April, 1911, the defendant Henry F. Wilson entered into a contract in writing at Lincoln, Nebraska, with the plaintiff, Robert W. Buchanan, by which he undertook to convey to plaintiff 1,960 acres of land in Brown county, Nebraska, in exchange for 160 acres of land in Otoe county, Nebraska. The papers relating to the transaction were to be left at the City National Bank to be turned over to the' respective parties on March 1, 1912. Each party to the ■ contract was to have the right to sell the land which he was to receive, but was not to be allowed to give possession until the 1st day of March, 1912. On the same day that the said contract in writing was executed and delivered, the said plaintiff and his wife, Ida L. Buchanan, executed a warranty deed to Henry F. Wilson for 160 acres of land
On October 26, 1911, the plaintiff commenced this action by filing his petition in the district court for Otoe county,. Nebraska, against the defendants. Subsequently an amended petition was filed. It alleges that the said Wilson, for the purpose of inducing the said plaintiff to make-the said trade, falsely stated that the said Brown county land had a market value of $12 an acre, and that it could be sold for that sum without difficulty; that land similar-to this particular land was selling at from $10 to $15 an acre; that a large part of this land was fit for cultivation, and that there was little or no sand on it; that it could be used for both winter and summer pasture; that the soil was perfect, and that the land could be rented for $700 a year; that if it was not worth $12 an acre to-the said plaintiff, Robert W. Buchanan, and could not be sold for that sum, the said defendant Henry P. Wilson would be willing to trade back; that the plaintiff had no-knowledge of the quality or value of the land, and so told the said Wilson, and that the plaintiff relied upon the representations which were made to him by Wilson in reference to the land, and in reliance upon the representations of said Wilson the said plaintiff entered into the said contract; that the delivery of the deeds in advance of the time stated in the contract was fraudulently procured by the defendant Henry P. Wilson for the purpose of incumbering the Otoe county land before the plaintiff Buchanan could ascertain the character and value of the said Brown county land; that the defendant Wilson had given a mortgage upon the Otoe county land, and that this was done fraudulently, and the plaintiff was unable to state whether the mortgagee was an innocent holder of said mortgage, but, if he was an innocent holder, then
The original petition was filed by the plaintiff, Robert W. Buchanan, in his own name and upon his own account, but the amended petition was in the name of “Robert W. Buchanan, by Ida L. Buchanan, his guardian,” and alleges, as additional grounds for maintaining the case, the incapacity of the plaintiff to transact business, and the appointment on December 2, 1911, of Ida L. Buchanan as the guardian of the plaintiff; that the said Ida L. B.uchanan was appointed the guardian of the plaintiff by the county court of Lancaster county, Nebraska, on the 2d day ■of December,. 1911; that during the months of March, April, and May the plaintiff evidenced a total want of reason and understanding in business affairs, and that his condition was perceptible to any one transacting business hath him, and that he was of unsound mind. It was also ■alleged that the plaintiff, at the time of making said contract, stated to the defendant Henry F. Wilson his lack of knowledge of the Brown county land, and also told the •said defendant that he was himself then incapable of contracting with him and of protecting bims’elf in the transaction ; that the Brown county land is not worth to exceed $3 an acre, and the rental value does not exceed $50 a year; and that, if the transaction be not annulled, the plaintiff must lose $15,000. It is also alleged that the title to said Brown county land was not merchantable, because the patent to a part of the same had not been delivered, and also because of a judgment which clouded the
The prayer attached to the amended petition is for a decree declaring the contract mentioned, the deed of exchange, and the mortgage and its assignment to be fraudulent and null and void, that a reconveyance of the Otoe county land to the plaintiff be required, and for judgment for $787, the amount paid the defendant Henry F. Wilson by the said plaintiff, or, in the alternative, if it be found that said mortgage was valid, that judgment be entered in favor of the plaintiff and against the defendant Henry F. Wilson for the amount thereof, the same to be declared a lien upon the Brown county land.
An answer was filed on behalf of the defendants Henry F. Wilson and Loma C.. Wilson. The defendants J. G-. Wadsworth and the Mutual Benefit Life Insurance Company filed answers. The defendants Henry F. Wilson and Loma C. Wilson answered that they were husband and wife and alleged that the plaintiff and his wife, Ida L. Buchanan, entered into the contract, admitted that the defendant Henry F. Wilson had been the owner of the Brown county land, alleged that deeds were executed by the plaintiff and wife to the defendant Henry F. Wilson, conveying the plaintiff’s Otoe county land to the said defendant Wilson, and also that deeds were executed to the plaintiff which conveyed the defendant’s Brown county land to the said plaintiff, admitted that the deeds were by agreement left at the City National Bank in Lincoln, Nebraska, as alleged in the petition and as provided by the terms of said contract, and that later, in May, 1911, the deeds were delivered to the respective grantees; that later a second deed of conveyance was made by the said plaintiff and his wife
The defendants Wadsworth and the Mutual Benefit Life Insurance Company set up the good faith of the transaction, and deny any knowledge of any mental or physical condition on the part of the plaintiff affecting his power to contract and convey land. They deny that the loan on the land was fraudulently made or for any illegitimate purpose, and say that the transaction was in good faith. They also deny all infirmities of title. The reply filed by the plaintiff is a general denial.
The evidence tends to show that the Brown county land had been occupied and owned by a family named Brill, from whom the defendant Henry F. Wilson acquired it. It would seem that the cost of the land to the defendant Wilson was about $17,650 in trade. He put in some land near Lincoln at a valuation of $10,000, and a house and lot in Lincoln at $5,000, and gave a mortgage back on the land for $2,650. This evidence concerning the trade for the Brown county land by the defendant Wilson is not seriously controverted, but it is insisted that the values were fictitious. There were two dwelling-houses on the premises, a barn, a granary, a buggy shed, a concrete cave, and an inclosure fenced for an orchard, which was “hog tight.” A creek ran through the land, and on this creek there was considerable timber growing, and that part of the track skirting the creek furnished excellent pasture. ’Some of the land is described as “pretty fair hay land.” Most of the witnesses described the land as smooth, except the bluff's near the creek. The soil is described as sandy loam and capable of being farmed, and wholly without alkali. These facts are gathered from an examination of the bill of exceptions. The land is six miles from Johns-town,” in Brown county, and five miles from Wood Lake.
The plaintiff Buchanan and the defendant Henry P. Wilson both lived in Lincoln, Nebraska, at the time the trade was made. Wilson had been a farmer in Iowa, and moved from there to Lincoln. The plaintiff had been a farmer in Otoe county, and lived in Syracuse, Nebraska. He had
The Brown county ranch was very unsatisfactory to plaintiff’s wife. She left the next day after seeing it. The plaintiff stayed a while. Mr. Bell testified: “Q. Did he indicate what his plans were or anything like that?' A. He thought he would go up there — move onto the ranch and run it himself- — probably take the boys with him, if he didn’t sell it.” He also testified that the plaintiff listed the land with him. At the time he did so, he prepared a description of the land to be presented to proposed purchasers, in which the land is described as situated on Evergreen creek, six miles northwest of Johnstown, and four miles northeast of Wood Lake, and all under fence with barbed wire and burr oak posts.
The district court held that the papers were obtained from the plaintiff by fraud; that no lien was obtained by the defendant Wadsworth and none by the insurance company, but that Wadsworth loaned the money in good faith, and that the insurance company should have a mortgage lien upon the Brown county land to secure the payment of the loan, and that the amount paid by the plaintiff to Wilson, after deducting the discount made, was $787, which the plaintiff should recover from Wilson. . The title to the Otoe county land was quieted in the plaintiff, and all interest of the plaintiff in the Brown county land was decreed to belong to the defendant Wilson, subject to the lien of the insurance company for the amount of the loan made upon the Otoe county land. The case was heard before Judge Travis July 8, 1912. The decree “finds the issues generally in favor of plaintiff and against the defendants, and that-the allegations of plaintiff’s amended petition are true.” It was further found that the contract, deeds, the $875 note, the $3,000 note and mortgage to Wadsworth, and all the papers pertaining to the transaction “were each and all executed by the plaintiff, Robert W. Buchanan, and wife, Henry F. Wilson and wife, and J. G. Wadsworth, while Robert W. Buclianan was not able to appreciate the consequences of his acts and while of unsound mind, and are null and void, and that all of the transactions between the plaintiff and Henry F. Wilson were also fraudulent and null and void, and all of said instruments are canceled and set aside.”
As we understand it, the plaintiff was not “insane,” according to the usual acceptation of the term. Insanity is a mental symptom or manifestation of physical disease which impairs the understanding, so that one or more faculties of the mind is perverted, weakened, or destroyed. In re Estate of Ayers, 84 Neb. 16" court="Neb." date_filed="1909-03-20" href="https://app.midpage.ai/document/dailey-v-treadwell-6658456?utm_source=webapp" opinion_id="6658456">84 Neb. 16. This man does not appear to have been wholly insane, but the evidence justi
To review the finding of the district court, we may briefly say that there was evidence tending to show that the use of the land was not of greater value than $59 a year. The defendant Wilson claimed it was worth $700 a year. There were some improvements on the land, and a part of it at least appears to be capable of being farmed. Many witnesses testified as to its value, and their estimates were so different that it would be impossible to discriminate between them and to judge of the value of their opinions without seeing them upon the witness-stand and hearing their testimony. The trial court had this advantage, and has practically found that there was such a discrepancy between the values of these respective tracts as to justify a general finding for the plaintiff, in view of the whole evidence taken in the case, and we are satisfied that this finding is fully warranted by the evidence.
If the weak mental condition of the plaintiff enabled the defendant Wilson to take advantage of him, and he did so, and thereby’fraudulently acquired the plaintiff’s property for much less than its true value, the contract should be rescinded, and the plaintiff should recover his property. It is immaterial whether the plaintiff was wholly insane at the time the trade was made, if his condition mentally was such as to permit the defendant to take advantage of him and to acquire his property for an insufficient consideration. It is proper for us to remember that the trial judge saw the witnesses and had an opportunity to judge of them by what he saw of them, and he also heard them testify, and for that reason he had an opportunity to form his conclusion as to whether they were telling the truth and the force and effect of. their evidence. In any event his opportunity was better than- ours.. While we are not bound by the findings and judgment of the district court, it is our duty to make such findings and to ren
Affirmed.