181 Iowa 1163 | Iowa | 1917
“State of Iowa, Emmet County, ss.:
“This agreement entered into between Thomas Maher, party of the first part, and G. E. Moore, party of the second part, both of Emmet County, Iowa, to wit: In consideration of $250 paid by the party of the second part to the first party, and the farther valuable consideration that the second party has for the last 10 years or more befriended, cared for in sickness, that the second party has cared for the first party as a child to parent and that the second party farther agrees to care for, nurse and provide for the sickness as in health for the first party, during the lifetime' of the first party. In consideration of aforesaid valuable consideration and other considerations not herein mentioned, the first party has this day deeded to the second party, his heirs and assigns, the north half of the northeast quarter of Section eleven (N% of NE14 of Sec. 11), Twp. 98, Range 33, to be holden by the second party to himsell and his heirs forever. To my two living daughters, Mrs-Jerry Flynn and Mrs. McSweeney, I expect to give my personal property, about $3,500, consisting of cash and certificates of deposit. To AndreAV Rokne I expect to give the southeast quarter of the northAvest quarter of Sec. 11, Twp. 98, Range 35, since said Andrew Rokne has also befriended*1166 me, and assisted with G. E. Moore in nursing and caring for me in sickness and in health and paid me in cash $500 in further consideration. The remainder of my property consisting of about 100 acres of land I have willed and bequeathed for various purposes as provided in said will. Dated this 11th day of October, 1912, in Emmet County, Iowa.”
The contract was dated back to correspond with the date of the deed, but it is admitted that same was not in fact executed until the 28th of October, 1912, the date on which same was acknowledged. Two or three days after the execution of the deed above referred to, deceased moved to the home of appellee and resided therein for several months, when he returned to his own home and remained for a considerable period. In the meantime, appellee erected a small house on his premises near his residence, in which deceased thereafter resided alone.
The grounds for setting aside the deed to the 80-acre tract, and upon which plaintiffs pray that title be quieted in them thereto, are as follows: (1) That at the time of the execution of said deed deceased was a person of unsound mind; (2) that the consideration for said conveyance was wholly inadequate; (3) that same was induced by appellee by the exercise of undue influence; and (i) that there was a failure of consideration.
Principal reliance is placed by appellants upon their contention that, at the time of the execution of said instruments, deceased was not possessed of such mental capacity as to comprehend and understand the nature and consequences thereof. No medical testimony was offered upon the trial, and it therefore does not appear of what physical •ailment deceased was at the time suffering. It is conceded that he was ill, and, on the day preceding or the day on which the deeds were executed, summoned a priest from Estherville, who administered the sacrament to him. No
Upon the occasion when the priest visited him, he apparently believed he was about to die, and gave to the priest $1,000- to be given to one of his daughters and $1,900 to be given to the other. He requested him to transmit these separate amounts to the daughters named. The priest did so, at the same time informing the daughters of their father’s condition. Upon the following day, they visited him, and, when called as witnesses herein, testified that he recognized them; that he was very feeble, and apparently could not live very long. They remained with him for about an hour, then returned to their homes at Rock Valley, and neither of them saw Mm again for many months. They apparently made no inquiry as to his condition for several weeks and received no reply to their inquiry for months, but they did not visit him until as above stated. Several witnesses called on behalf of plaintiffs detailed conversations with Mm relating principally to matters above stated, and expressed the opinion that he was of unsound mind. Other witnesses called on behalf of appellee expressed the contrary opinion. At the time of his illness he gave some bees to a neighbor, but, when he recovered, demanded and was paid $12 therefor. He was at one time the owner of an old corn planter, which witnesses testified was wholly worthless, but which he claimed to have improved by removing some of -the necessary parts therefrom, and he offered to sell same for $10 and refused to take less. But few other business
To justify the court in cancelling the deed to appellee and quieting title to said land in plaintiffs, we must find from the evidence that the mental powers of deceased had so far deteriorated or been destroyed by age, disease or physical weakness that he was incapable of understanding in a reasonable degree the nature and consequences of the transactions complained of. Nowlen v. Nowlen, 122 Iowa 541; Corrette v. United Pres. Church, 154 Iowa 383; Altig v. Altig, 137 Iowa 420; Mathews v. Nash, 151 Iowa 125; Swartwood v. Chance, 131 Iowa 714.
It has been repeatedly held by this court that a contract or conveyance cannot be avoided upon the ground of insanity, where the evidence shows only that grantor was suscep
Without further discussion or elaboration of the evidence, nothing appears in the record tending in any way to sustain plaintiffs’ claim that there was any effort made by appellee to induce deceased to make the conveyance.
We have carefully examined the record in this case, with a special reference to each ground relied upon by appellants for reversal of the judgment of the trial court; and, while the evidence shows many eccentricities and peculiarities of deceased, we reach the conclusion that the court rightly dismissed plaintiffs’ petition and taxed the costs to them, and the judgment is — Affirmed.