Flynn v. Moore

181 Iowa 1163
CourtSupreme Court of Iowa
DecidedDecember 11, 1917
StatusPublished
Cited by5 cases

This text of 181 Iowa 1163 (Flynn v. Moore) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Iowa primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Flynn v. Moore, 181 Iowa 1163 (iowa 1917).

Opinion

Stevens^ J.

1' tty™mentaiia" believable un" ebaraeter: effect. I. Thomas Maher died testate November 6, 1915, at the age of 94 years, seized of a tract of something over 100 acres of land in Emmet County. He was survived by two daughters, the appellants herein, and several grandchildren, as his only heirs at law, all of whom are named as beneficiaries in his will. He was twice married, but both of his wives were deceased long prior to his death. The appellant Mary McSweeney is a daughter by his first marriage. On April 27, 1911, he executed a will by the terms of which he bequeathed $200 for mass; a like sum for a tombstone; $1,000 to the Catholic Church of Estherville; $100 to a Norwegian Protestant church located near his residence; $200 to St. Mary’s Academy, at Quincy, Illinois; $2,000 to each of his two daughters; and the residue of his estate to his children, grand[1165]*1165children, and Jerry Flynn, his son-in-law, share and share alike. The will was filed and admitted to probate without objection. On October 11, 1912, he conveyed to appellee the north half of the northeast quarter of Section 11, Township 98, Range 33, and to Andrew Rokne the southeast quarter of the northwest quarter of Section 11, Township 98, Range 35. The consideration expressed in the deed to appellee Avas $250. The deed to Rokne is not set out in the abstract, but the consideration therein appears, from the evidence, to have been $500. On the 28th of the same month, deceased, appellee, and Rokne entered into a contract in writing as follows:

“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]*1166me, 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 [1167]*1167physician was, however, called to attend him. Appellee and Rokne came to see him, and the deeds were executed at the request of deceased, and, so far as appears from a careful reading of the record, without previous knowledge upon their part of the intention or desire of deceased, to convey the above respective tracts of land to them, and without solicitation or inducement upon their p^art. At the time the priest visited him, deceased requested him to notify appellee and Rokne that he desired to see them, and gave him directions where they might be found. At the time of the above transactions, deceased resided in a filthy hovel on his premises on the banks of a small lake, and the priest testified that his bedding, clothing and person were so extremely filthy and dirty that he appeared not to have washed his face or hands for many years. To sustain plaintiff’s claim that the deceased was at the time of unsound mind, evidence was offered tending to show the extremely filthy surroundings in which deceased lived and his long-established habit of personal uncleanliness; that about 30 years before his death he was extremely brutal and unkind to his wife, who, on account thereof, separated from him, and moved, with the children, to Estherville; that upon one occasion he inflicted upon her such severe physical injuries ■and became so violently angry that she went out in the. woods and remained for several days; that upon her return he manifested no interest in her condition nor regret for his brutality, and refused to call a physician to attend her or permit her to use a team to go to town for the purpose of consulting a doctor. He was penurious and close in financial matters, and shortly after he separated from his wife began talking to his 'friends and neighbors upon religious subjects, claiming that he was not a worldly, but a spiritual, man, that he would live until his flesh fell from his hands; often expressed a desire to be crucified, and one witness testified that he requested him to get a sharp ax [1168]*1168and cut off Ms head; claimed that God had revealed to him that chairs had spirits, and that the world was going to be destroyed. Other peculiarities of mind-and eccentricities were testified to by some of the witnesses, but the above are the principal facts detailed touching his mental condition. He lived as a hermit in his hut on the banks of a lake, but it is not shown that he did not possess average capacity to understand and carry on and transact ordinary-business.

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.

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

Related

Olsson v. Pierson
25 N.W.2d 357 (Supreme Court of Iowa, 1946)
In Re Estate of Johnson
269 N.W. 792 (Supreme Court of Iowa, 1936)
Ennor v. Hinsch
260 N.W. 26 (Supreme Court of Iowa, 1935)
Osborn v. Fry
209 N.W. 303 (Supreme Court of Iowa, 1926)
Cavanagh v. O'Connor
186 Iowa 257 (Supreme Court of Iowa, 1918)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
181 Iowa 1163, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/flynn-v-moore-iowa-1917.