Davis v. Strange's

8 L.R.A. 261, 11 S.E. 406, 86 Va. 793, 1890 Va. LEXIS 45
CourtSupreme Court of Virginia
DecidedApril 10, 1890
StatusPublished
Cited by12 cases

This text of 8 L.R.A. 261 (Davis v. Strange's) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Virginia primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Davis v. Strange's, 8 L.R.A. 261, 11 S.E. 406, 86 Va. 793, 1890 Va. LEXIS 45 (Va. 1890).

Opinion

Fauntleroy J.,

delivered the opinion of the court.

The bill in this cause was filed by appellant, Alice Lee Strange, to vacate and annul, and to set aside a deed, executed [794]*794by her August 26th, 1887, by which she conveyed to Thomas V. Strange a house and lot in the city of Lynchburg, Ta., of the value of $8,000 or $10,000, without consideration; in a situation of sudden surprise and emergency of action; without the presence or advice of friend or counsel; and when she was rendered wholly unable to exercise a consenting mind, by the undue influence of her father and of his attorney and agent, who presses her with importunity and strong pursuasions, and assurances that she would be otherwise provided for and compensated; that she should not lose anything by it; and that it would be best for her to make the property back to Mr. Strange, as it was threatened to be burned; under the'compulsion of which, she, hastily and inconsiderately, executed the deed, to which she had been already most powerfully moved and induced by the distress and suffering, expressed and exhibited to her, of her aged and devoted father; occasioned to him by the reproaches and importunate remonstrances and interference of his son-in-law and other daughter.

The facts of this case, as disclosed in the record, show the environments of the appellant, and the actual, relative, and correlative circumstances in which she was placed, and under which she was improperly induced to the hasty, inconsiderate and unconscionable transaction, which she prays to be relieved from by the equitable jurisdiction of this court, reviewing the denial of her prayer and the dismissal of her bill by the circuit court.

Alice Lee Strange, who, siuce this suit was instituted, has intermarried with Joseph S. Davis, is the natural daughter of the late Thomas Y. Strange, of Lynchburg, a white man, by a colored woman named “ Belle.” She was received into -the family of her father as his child, and treated, both by his wife and himself, as the petted daughter of the household, with equal rights and recognition with his legitimate child. Every advantage of education was afforded her; and, when old enough to leave the paternal roof, she was sent to a boarding-[795]*795school in Washington city, where she remained until she graduated. It is the fact.—the status—of this relation of parent and child, and the family recognition and association, which obtained between the appellant and her father and his household, which it. is important, to state aud remark: however revolting to the moral sense and offensive against public policy. The relations which existed between her and her father and his wife and'the whole family, are indicated by a number of letters from her father to her, written during her absence in Washington, which are filed as exhibits with the bill. They show the deepest parental affection and the most anxious and tender solicitude and guardian care over her and for her as his favorite child; and his liberal intentions toward her in regard to his estate, and that he freely conferred with her in regard to his intentions. They not only show her environments and motives, which, through her filial feelings, over-mastered her will in the rash and immoderate act into which she was precipitated, and from which she now seeks relief; but they reveal the hidden thought,' powerful influences and agencies which instigated and controlled a transaction, in which her father was as unwilling and as much wronged a victim as was the daughter herself.

We cannot extend these letters, in this opinion, as they appear in the record, in their full length and significance ; hut a few extracts from some of them will illustrate our commentary. On the 18th of JSTovember, 1878, he writes :

“My Dear Alice: Yours to mine of the lltli inst., was read to me last night by Minnie, (his wife) so far as she could for sobbing; for she can never read your letters without crying. Please recollect what I have before said to you, that is to do well for yourself; if you do that, all will be -well with you. That means much more, perhaps than you are aware. It is the great concern of men advanced in life, to know what to do with what they have accumulated by industry and economy [796]*796and prudence; men of my own stamp, for instance, don’t leave their effects to fools and spendthrifts.”

On the 12th of December, 1878, he writes :

“ Dear Amce : Your postal card to Minnie (his wile) to hand at. the store (of Strange & Litchford). You know that Í have before asked you not to write on P. 0. to us. It is a fact, that we have kept secret from you, that you are hated by one in the family with unequaled hatred, and simply because Minnie and myself love and provide for you, and so intend to do. It was because of that that Nannie (Mrs. Litchford) went to the springs last summer, at. a cost of $150, to prevent her from staying in the house with negroes. When you yisit Lynch-burg you are not to visit them, though Nannie and the children will visit you. I hope and pray that your talents will place you head and shoulders ahead of them, whilst I wish them all good luck, both parties are of my family. I care for all, and w'ish to place all beyond the powers of this world, but you in particular I wish to see stand prominent in the land because of your worth. We don’t hear from Belle and Charlie.”

On the 31st of July, 1879, he writes :

“ Dear Loved One : Your last of 30th inst. to hand; all three of your letters to hand. Last one causes uneasiness for fear of my letter to you on Monday, 28tli, draft for $25, is lost or stolen. * * Don’t think that I will ever forget you. That would be impossible, after Minnie and myself having raised you, and the request that I would never forsake you, and still more to stand by and see you complete your studies. Two people were never more devoted to each other than Minnie and myself, and for her sake, if no more, you will not be forgotten or forsaken. Death is one of the uncertain things of the world, and therefore I shall leave in the hands of J. E. Yoder some important papers for you, and with the request, in the event, of my death, that you be at 'once informed of it, that [797]*797the proper steps may be taken to secure your interest. I have much to say. God bless you.”

On the 10th of October, 1879, he writes:

“Dear Child Alice: Some several years since I made a will, which was then my will, hut since the death of Minnie (his wife) it is right to make another, which was done yesterday, and is in the hands of J. E. Yoder, who was one of the witnesses of the same, as was also Mr. Work and Mayor Branch, in which yon are largely interested. Should I drop off you will he posted. It is entirely secret, and will so remain until my death. Say nothing of it to any one, but I have made arrangement for Belle to have $150 per annum, unless she marry; in that event she has nothing. I mention this to assure you that you will never be forgotten. Yot a word from you since the telegram. How is that? God bless you, Belle and Charlie. It you write, and I don’t get them, I must get a box to myself.”

Thus showing his apprehension that some one unfriendly to her (meaning his son-in-law and partner) would intercept their correspondence if his mail continued to come with the general mail of Strange & Litchford.

On the 23d of October, 1879, he writes :

“ Yours of the 19th and 20th to hand.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Preston v. Preston
128 A. 292 (Supreme Court of Connecticut, 1925)
Hogan v. Leeper
1913 OK 428 (Supreme Court of Oklahoma, 1913)
Bowen v. Kutzner
167 F. 281 (Fourth Circuit, 1908)
Estate of Coleman
44 A. 1085 (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 1899)
Thomas v. Turner's Adm'r
12 S.E. 149 (Supreme Court of Virginia, 1890)
Armstrong v. Stone
9 Gratt. 102 (Supreme Court of Virginia, 1852)
Phippen v. Durham
8 Va. 457 (Supreme Court of Virginia, 1852)
Chamberlaine v. Marsh's Administrator
6 Va. 283 (Supreme Court of Virginia, 1819)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
8 L.R.A. 261, 11 S.E. 406, 86 Va. 793, 1890 Va. LEXIS 45, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/davis-v-stranges-va-1890.