85 F. 703 | 9th Cir. | 1898
Lead Opinion
This is a suit brought against the executors of the last will and testament of William S. Ladd, deceased, to seek an accounting for 5,700 shares of the capital stock of the Oregon Steam Navigation Company and the dividends received thereon, which stock belonged to J. Wesley Ladd, thé first husband of the complainant Sarah F. Hiller, at the time of his death, on February 28, 1S71. The facts out of which the suit arose, and concerning which there is no dispute, are as follows:
The Oregon Steam Navigation Company was incorporated October 20, 1862, under the laws of the state of Oregon, with a capital stock of $2,000,000, divided into 4,000 shares of $500 each. Prior to 1868 the owners of the stock of the Oregon Steam Navigation Company had started an opposition to Ben Holladay’s steamship lines, and were contemplating still further opposition. They devised a scheme to counteract opposition from that source by placing the ownership of the stock of their corporation ostensibly in the hands of Alvinza Hayward, a citizen of California, and a friend of Ben Hollad ay and of W. C. Ralston, president of the Bank of California, who was one of Holladay’s backers. This scheme was carried out. Hayward consented to the arrangement, received the stock, and assured Holladay that he was the owner of the Oregon Steam Navigation Company. J. Wesley Ladd was at that time the California agent of the Oregon Steam Navigation Company, and an intimate friend of Hayward, and was the active agent in procuring the transfer of the stock to Hayward. About this time the owners of the stock of the Oregon Steam Navigation Company became apprehensive that the Northern Pacific Railroad Company would either put a line of opposition steamers on the Columbia river, or would do business by rail, through its road about to be constructed by the Columbia river valley, so as to destroy or injure their business. They determined, therefore, to make an effort to sell out to the Northern Pacific Railroad Company. The principal stockholders of the Oregon Steam Navigation Company at that time were J. Wesley Ladd, J. O. Ainsworth, R. R. Thompson, S. G. Reed, W. S. Ladd, and C. E. Tilton. In 1868 the capital stock was increased from $2,000,000 to $5,000,000, divided into 50,000 shares of $100 each, and of the total stock 48', 125 shares were issued to Alvinza Hayward. Of this he owned in his own right 2,500 shares, which the others gave him as compensation for his part in the transaction. J. Wesley Ladd’s proportion of the stock so
J. Wesley Ladd did not die until February 28, 1871. In the meantime he received from Hayward the dividends on his stock as they were declared and paid, but no indorsement was made of these payments on the note or otherwise. In March, 1872, the Northern Pacific Railroad Company sent for Ainsworth, and he wenl East, accompanied by li. E. Thompson. They went from Portland by way of Ban Francisco, and obtained from Hayward 22,437 shares, 'which he then held for J. Wesley Ladd, W. S. Ladd, and C. E. Tilton; Ainsworth, Eeed, and Thompson having received hack from Hayward the stock which he had held in trust for them. It was the expectation that every share would be sold to the Northern Pacific Company. Ainsworth was unable to accomplish this. The railroad company preferred that he and his associates should hold one-fourth, and manage the property. He therefore delivered three-fourths of each of
The substantial allegations of the bill of complaint are that J. Wesley Ladd and W. S. Ladd were jointly interested in manipulating the stock of the Oregon Steam Navigation Company, and that, at the time of the death of said J. Wesley Ladd, Alvinza Hayward held in his own name, in trust for him, 7,600 shares of the stock of said corporation; that, for many years prior to the death of J. W. Ladd, W. S. Ladd held his power of attorney, and managed their stocks in said corporation without interference on the part of J. Wesley Ladd; that, in the will of J. Wesley Ladd, he expressed the earnest desire that his wife should place her property in the hands of W. S. Ladd to invest and manage for her, as he had the utmost confidence in his ability and integrity; that he also stated in his will, “It is my desire and request that the property acquired before my marriage be considered and treated as community property, and not as separate property;” that in fact, at the death of J. Wesley Ladd, one-half his property belonged to his widow in her own right as survivor, under the laws of the state of California, and she was entitled, under said law, to receive one-half of the other moiety of said property; that the will of J. Wesley Ladd was admitted to probate in San Francisco, on March 8, 1871, and W. S. Ladd, J. M. French, and the complainant Sarah F. Hiller were appointed executors; that Mrs. Hiller permitted W. 'S. Ladd to assume, and he did assume, as executor of said estate, the exclusive management thereof in the probate court, she acting only to execute such papers as she was told to execute by him; that on May 15, 1872, the said W. S. Ladd caused to be prepared, and procured Mrs. Hiller to execute, an instrument admitting that it was the intention of the will to bequeath to her one half of the property of the estate, and to the other legatees the other half, and to execute to him, on May 16, 1872, a trust conveyance of all her property, and a power of attorney, under which he took possession of all the estate of Mrs. Hiller, and managed her property as her agent and trustee until his death, in January, 1893, except that in 1880 he surrendered to her the proceeds of 950 shares of Oregon Steam Navigation Company stock, and from time to time paid her sums of money for her use; that there has never been any settlement and accounting between her and said W. S. Ladd; that, during her absence in Europe, said W. S. Ladd filed his final account in the probate court in San Francisco in the matter of J. Wesley Ladd’s estate, and on September 12, 1872, fraudulently pro
Upon the appeal to this court, one of the theories on which the bill is framed, and one series of its allegations, are abandoned. It is not con
It is impossible to read the testimony concerning J. Wesley Ladd’s stock in the .Oregon Steam Navigation Company, its transfer to Hayward, and the execution of the §190,000 note in lieu thereof, without arriving at the conclusion that, beyond any doubt, the complainant Mrs. Hiller knew all the attendant circumstances. In the first place, she does not anywhere in her testimony deny that she had such knowledge. The general trend of her testimony is that she does not now remember the facts. When asked whether or not her husband, shortly before his death, did not discuss with her the condition of his estate and her probable means of livelihood, she answered:
“I could not give you any exact words or anything' of that sort, hut I would not say that he did not. It is more than probable that he did. Q. Did he not give you some idea in what his wealth or income-making- property consisted? A. Yes, sir; I think he did, but X could not tell you now-. Q. At the time that the estate was being settled up, in 1871, you knew that, as a part of the assets of that estate, there was O. S. N. stock, did you not? A. I could not tell you now*713 whether I knew it or not. Q. Are yon prepared to say that you did not know it? A. No, sir; I would not say that.”
When she is interrogated as to her knowledge of certain suits, called “Oregon Hteam Navigation Company suits,” that were then pending against some of the purchasers of the stock which had been transferred to Hayward, her answer was that she presumed she was familiar with them at that time, but could not give the history of them now, and that she has heard of the Oregon Steam .Navigation Company suits. Concerning the execution of the paper of May 15, 3872, whereby she assented to the division of the estate into moieties, it appears from her own testimony that the paper was prepared by Mr. E. E. Haft, who was J. Wesley Ladd’s lawyer; and from the testimony of Mr. Tilton arid of Mr. Haft it appears that the idea of so construing the will originated with the attorney and with Mrs. Hiller herself. They were both present when she signed the instrument in Han Francisco. Mr. Haft testifies that the instrument was prepared at Mrs. Hiller’s request; that she executed it readily; and that he distinctly recollects that she remarked that she was satisfied that it was the intention of her husband that she should have only one-half of all the estate. He testifies that in none of these mailers of the estate had he any instructions from W. H. Ladd, but that he talked with Mr. French, one of the co-executors with Mr. Ladd, and he had no knowledge of any instructions coming through Mr. French, from W. 8. Ladd; that he was first requested to prepare these papers by Mr. French, on behalf of Mrs. Hiller, and (hat he declined to do so without seeing her personally; she was then brought down to his office, and he read to her and explained both of them: that he told her that the will might possibly be construed so as to give her three-fourths instead of one-half of the estate. Mrs. W. S. Ladd testifies that on a visit received by her from Mrs. Hiller, soon after el. Wesley Ladd’s death, she said Wesley had done right in giving the other heirs the other half, and expressed herself as perfectly satisfied, so far as it concerned herself, with the distribution made by her husband of his estate.
It appears from the evidence that: J. Wesley Ladd was the originator of the Hayward pool. His own. correspondence shows this, and reveals the intimacy of his association with Hayward. On December 28, 18G9, he wrote to Tilton regarding a prospective meeting between himself, Tilton, and W*. S. Ladd, and said of the latter: “T want very much to see him, and have a good long talk. Besides, I deem it prudent to arrange my little affairs, so that, if X should drop out, it will not necessarily bring to light matters we desire to remain dark. If I can get you, William, and Hayward together a day or so, can arrange for any contingency.” In his letter to Tilton, May 5, 3870, he says: “I expect you have seen Ainsworth, and hope there is a prospect of selling out to the Northern Pacific people.” Mr. Tilton testifies that Hayward had received from J. Wesley Ladd Ml power to sell the stock. “He made an arrangement with Hayward that Hayward should take his stock, and have Ml control of it,' — full power to sell; and he [Hayward] gave his note for §3.90.000, with the understanding that, should a trade he made with the Northern Pacific, he should have the Ml benefit of it * * * That it would he easier, and facilitate, if he
There is nowhere in the record a word of denial of any of this testimony, nor is there any evidence whatever tending in any way to rebut it. It stands unexplained and uncontradicted. The testimony clearly shows that-all that was done in reference to the construction of the will and the distribution of the estate of J. Wesley Ladd was done at the instance of and with the full knowledge and acquiescence of his widow. There is no evidence whatever upon which to base a charge of fraud or undue influence on the part of W. S. Ladd, or to show that he took any
The appellants further contend that in equity W. S. Ladd was under obligation to admit Mrs. Hiller to the repurchase pool, and that he must be deemed to have repurchased for her benefit her proportion of the stock of said corporation, and that his estate is now chargeable with the profit which he realized thereon. It is argued that an executor who -has permitted stock of the estate to be sold without decree or confirmation by the probate court cannot thereafter buy it in for himself, and sell it at a profit, without accounting to the estate for so much thereof as he has so permitted to be sold contrary to law, at the ratio of the profit which he derived upon the resale; and it is said that for the first year, at least, of the time covered by the purchases for the pool, Mrs. Hiller had sufficient money in the hands of W. S. Ladd to have enabled her to come into the syndicate. The first year of the syndicate was 1876. At the beginning of that year, it is proven, and is not disputed, that Mrs. Hiller owed W. S. Ladd an overdraft of more than $3,000, and that at the 'end of the year thé overdraft was considerably larger, and that the only assets in his hands belonging to her were her 950 shares of Oregon Steam Navigation Company stock, and some city-bonds in which her money had been invested, and which were paying a good rate of interest. It would have been impossible for him to have invested her property in the repurchase of Oregon Steam Navigation Company stocks, except by selling either her shares in that corporation or her city bonds. The repurchase of the stock was purely a matter of speculation. The purchasers believed, and evidently with good réason, that the stock was of greater value than the prices which they were required to pay, but they incurred the risk of losing by their investment. In any possible view of the repurchase, it was a transaction which in .no way concerned Mrs. Hiller. If it is true, as contended by counsel •for appellants, that W. S. Ladd, as executor, did cause to be sold unlawfully the shares of stock which his brother held in the Hayward pool, and thereby became accountable to Mrs. Hiller for the loss which she sustained, the demands of justice would be satisfied upon his accounting to her for her damage thereby sustained, and there would be no further accountability to her for any subsequent dealing by him in stock of the same company. If, on the other hand, he did not cause the sale of the stock to be unlawfully made, and if she knew and acquiesced in that sale, ás we have found that she did, then likewise it follows that he was as free to speculate or invest in Oregon Steam Navigation Company stock thereafter as in any other stock, and owed no duty whatever to her in relation thereto. - There was no partnership relation between -,W. S. Ládd and Mrs. Hiller, or between any of the members of the
But it is unnecessary to further discuss the transactions concerning which the accounting is sought. The settlement between W. S. Ladd and the complainants in 1880 was final and conclusive of all matters which are made the subject of the present controversy. The circumstances leading up to that settlement are as follows: Early in the summer of 1872, immediately after signing her power of attorney to W. S. Ladd, Mrs. Hiller went to Europe. While there, it is shown that she spent her money freely and extravagantly. January 10, 1873, she wrote to W. 8. Ladd for a $10,000 letter of credit, and says: “I know exactly where ail the money goes, and it does go.” In one of her letters she mentions a purchase of laces amounting to $2,000. In another she refers to herself as having tin; reputation of being a gay widow, but says it is undeserved. Within 18 months after her husband’s death, she announced her engagement to be married. By December, 1872, in addition to $8,500 al-’ lowed her by the probate court, she had drawn from W. 8. Ladd more than $35,000. The following year she drew over $21,000; the following year $19,000; and by December, 1875, she had drawn $91,579.78. After her return from Europe, in 3.874, she speculated in stocks in San Francisco. Mr. Ladd was constantly writing her, cautioning her against her extravagance and stock speculation. On June 16, 1875,, referring to the fact that he had written her that she had drawn $81,239, she wrote: “With regard to the $81,239, I have lived and invested the best I knew how under all the circumstances; and if I have learned, like; hundreds of others, to shun stocks as a pestilence or a ravening death, why, I have no one but myself to blame for any foolish act of mine.” On November 27, 1875, she wrote: “I hope I shall not be disappointed in getting the oilier $5,000, for on it hangs my fate. I am going to keep trying; if I am pushed under at one point, fry until I rise to the surface elsewhere.” On March 19, 1879, W. 8. Ladd wrote her: “Inclosed please And copy of trial balance of your books up to date. You have; received $101,027, while the income from the estate, your portion, has been only some $61,726.43, showing you have drawn over and above your income $39,273.84. This latter sum is drawn on the principal. This being kept up will in time find the end.” On March 28, 1879, she answered: “No person realizes the error of my ways
It is the contention of the appellants that the settlement was conclusive only as to the 950 shares of Oregon Steam Navigation Company stock which Mrs. Hiller held at that date, and that at the time of the settlement she was not aware that any greater number of shares had belonged to her husband’s estate, or that any of her stock had been sold in the Hayward pool. It is possible, but not probable, that in 1880 Mrs. Hiller had forgotten the facts in regard to the Hayward pool, but, if she had, her attention was then pointedly and sufficiently directed to them. In arriving at the settlement at Portland, Van Bokkelen, her accountant, who was also her accountant in preparing for the present suit, particularly noticed the entries on the statements furnished by W. S. Ladd showing various payments through C. E. Tilton to Mrs. Hiller’s credit, and indicating that the principal portion of her funds came from that source. It is hardly to be conceived that in a hostile settlement, such as was then liad, and with the period of two weeks in which to examine into matters preparatory to executing a release which was intended to settle all things, “from the beginning of the world” until that date, the accountant did not in fact ascertain what was the source of the payments which came through Tilton, never inquired what became of the Oregon Steam Navigation Company stock which was mentioned on the trial balance left by J. 'Wesley Ladd, and never ascertained the facts concerning that stock and the Hayward pool. Van Bokkelen’s relation to the suit is not that of an accountant only. By his own admission, he is interested in the result of the suit, and is to receive a share of any moneys that may be recovered by the complainants. It is in evidence, further, that in 1874 Mrs. Hiller’s memory concerning these matters had been refreshed by an investigation
If it were to be conceded that Mrs. Hiller did not, during the time covered by the probate proceedings, know that nearly all of her husband’s estate consisted in Oregon Steam Navigation Company stock, and that she was not aware of the contents of the paper which she signed, consenting to the division of the estate, and never learned those facts until shortly before the commencement of the present suit, and if she had never made the settlement of 1880, her laches would, nevertheless, bar her from recovery in this suit; for it is not disputed that she was one of the executors of the will, that she knew the provisions of the will, and knew that she signed a paper consenting to a distribution. The records of the probate proceedings were at all times accessible to her. How much the more do her laches bar her when we consider that she does not deny the positive and credible testimony of other witnesses, and the statements of her own letters, showing that she had full knowledge of all her rights in the stock held in the Hayward pool, and of her rights under the will, at the time when she consented to the distribution of the estate, and that thereafter her memory was refreshed in regard to these matters, in 1874, when a complaint was prepared and read to her, but she declined to bring ilie suit, and again in 1875, when she sent to W. S. Ladd J. Wesley Ladd’s trial balance, and made inquiry concerning certain items thereof, and again in 1880, when all prior transactions were brought under review, and a general settlement of them was effected? It is not claimed for the appellants that, after the settlement of 1880, new facts concerning the Oregon Steam Navigation Company stock came to their knowledge before bringing this suit. They allege in the bill, it is true, that they had heard rumors to the effect that they had been defrauded in reference to that stock. What the rumors were, or whence they emanated, is hot disclosed in the testimony. Van Bokkelen accounts for the cominencement of the suit in a way which seems reasonable and probable. He says that I)r. Hiller came to him about March 30, 1892, and told him he wanted him to take hold of these accounts and re-examine them. “He said he had sent up to Portland, and had them overhauling the books up Hiere, and lie then discovered about the repurchase pool matter; and in looking over the O. S. N. Co. stock, and the division of it into six interests, and the fact that the two interests had been held by Quaekeubusli, — that was what really started me into this investigation.” It appears, then, that it
The appellants make the further suggestion that the trust created by the conveyance and power of attorney of May 16, 1872, continued by the terms thereof until the death of W. S. Ladd, in January, 1893, and that a portion of the trust estate was never accounted for. They refer to a trial balance made for Mrs. Hiller by W.'S. Ladd on March 19, 1879, on which appear the following entries: St. Helens property, $125.75; Puget Sound lands, $113.75; Malden, Mass., property, $1,210.98. And they contend that as to these items of property the trust still exists. There is nothing in the evidence to show whether, as to these items, there is now or ever was a trust. The bill does not charge that these properties were included in the trust, or that they have not been accounted for. It contains no mention of them whatever. The deed of trust itself does not specify the trust property. It conveys by general terms the property obtained from the probate court and the property situated in the state of Oregon. There is no evidence that these specified properties are situated in the state of Oregon. In the same trial balance is one other item under the head of “Beal Estate,” to wit, “Stanley place, $3,000.” In the correspondence between W. S. Ladd and Mrs. Hiller, it appears from, several references thereto that the rent of the Stanley place for many years was collected by Mrs. Hiller, and that from time to time she accounted to W. S. Ladd for one-half thereof. It is probable that all the items of real estate on the trial balance were entered there for no other reason than that W. S. Ladd, as trustee for the legatees of J. Wesley Ladd’s estate, was entitled to receive one-half the rents of the same, and one-half the proceeds thereof whenever a sale should be made. Whether the sale was made and proceeds distributed at the tíme of the settlement in 1880 or after-wards we have no information, and under the allegation of the bill, and the evidence, we have no warrant for entering any order or decree concerning the same. We can conceive of no interpretation of the facts in this case which will entitle the appellants to relief in a court of equity. The decree of the circuit court will be affirmed, with costs to the appellees.
Concurrence Opinion
(concurring). I am unable to concur in the foregoing opinion in respect to the merits of this cause, but concur in the judgment on the ground of the complainants’ laches.