Foltz v. Hart

84 Ind. 56
CourtIndiana Supreme Court
DecidedMay 15, 1882
DocketNo. 9793
StatusPublished

This text of 84 Ind. 56 (Foltz v. Hart) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Indiana Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Foltz v. Hart, 84 Ind. 56 (Ind. 1882).

Opinion

Black, C.

The appellees, trustees of the Third Street Methodist Episcopal Church of Indianapolis, filed their petition, seeking to have the appellant, executor of the last will and testament of Louisa J. Jones, deceased, cited to appear and show cause why he should not be ordered to pay the petition- o ers the sum of $2,000, bequeathed to the appellees by said testatrix out of her personal estate, and alleging, among other things, that said executor had failed to, include in his inventory of the personal estate of the decedent a certain debt due said estate from one Jesse Jones, amounting to $2,700.

The appellant appeared, and issues were formed, on the trial of which the court, at the request of appellant, stated in writing the facts and the conclusions of law thereon.

Appellant excepted to the conclusions of law, and filed a motion for a new trial, assigning as causes that the finding was contrary to law and contrary to the evidence.

This motion having been overruled, the court rendered judgment that the appellees recover of the appellant the.sum of $2,000 and costs, to be paid by said executor out of the assets of said estate in due course of administration.

The evidence was, in substance, as follows: The testatrix died February 16th, 1879. Her will was duly admitted to probate, and appellant was duly appointed and qualified as executor thereof March 21st, 1879. She bequeathed to the appellees $2,000, to be paid only out of her personal estate after the payment of her debts, and devised to the appellant, [58]*58in trust for her two'daughters, all her real estate, subject to a life-estate in a portion thereof in her husband, Jesse Jones.

The debts of the decedent exhausted all her personal estate, leaving no funds with which to pay the bequest to appellees, unless a certain debt of said Jesse Jones, of $2,700, was an indebtedness to her.

On the 18th of January, 1878, and for some time before that date, said Jesse 'had been indebted to said Louisa, his wife, in the sum of $5,000, the debt growing out of certain business transactions between them. At the date last mentioned, said Jesse bought of one Maria Pope lot 6, in square 1, of the city of Indianapolis, worth $5,000, and, by an arrangement with said Louisa, he caused said lot 6 to be conveyed to her by Mrs. Pope by warranty deed, in considerate tion of which said Jesse conveyed to Mrs. Pope certain real estate of his and agreed to pay off and remove certain encumbrances on said lot 6 (which were not mentioned in Mrs. Pope’s said deed of conveyance thereof), amounting to $2,700. Said Jesse caused said lot 6 to be thus conveyed to said Louisa in satisfaction of his said indebtedness to her, and it was received by her in full payment thereof.

In order to obtain the money with which he paid off said encumbrances on said lot 6, amounting to $2,700, said Jesse borrowed of the Connecticut Mutual Life Insurance Company that amount of cash, for which he gave his note, with interest coupon notes, to said company, on the 25th of January, 1878, due in five years thereafter, and, to secure said loan, said Jesse and.said Louisa, at the same time, executed to said company a mortgage on said lot 6. During the remainder of the lifetime of said Louisa, said Jesse paid, out of his own funds, the coupon notes as they matured; and, as between him and said Louisa, he was to pay off said $2,700, and the debt was considered as his debt. There was but one debt of $2,700, and that was the debt for which said Jesse gave his said notes to said insurance company, and he and his said wife executed [59]*59said mortgage; and if he had paid these notes he would be under no liability to said decedent’s estate.

"When said executor, the appellant, took possession of the decedent’s real estate, as directed by the will, he found said lot 6 encumbered by said mortgage to said insurance company. • Said Jesse was then in a fair way to become insolvent:, and the executor was apprehensive that, in that event, the decedent’s estate would have to pay off said mortgage. He thereupon requested said Jesse to arrange his matters so as to save the estate from loss if he should fail financially. Said Jesse then proposed an arrangement, which was made, by which, on the 16th of May, 1879, he conveyed to said executor, as such, certain parcels of real estate then owned by said Jesse, of the value of $2,700, and in consideration thereof said executor agreed, on behalf of said estate, to assume, take care of and pay off said mortgage indebtedness to said insurance company, and to relieve said Jesse from paying any further attention to it.

Shortly after this transaction, said Jesse became wholly insolvent, and so continued at the time of the trial of this cause, up to which time said executor had paid off every coupon interest note aforesaid that had matured after the making of saiqjt arrangement, and said executor was preparing to pay off said principal note when it should fall due, and said Jesse had paid no further attention to.the indebtedness to the insurance company.

On said 16th of May, 1879, the date of said arrangement between said Jesse and said executor, the latter filed in the court below, in which the settlement of said decedent’s estate was pending, his petition as such executo'r, showing to the court how said indebtedness of said Jesse to his said wife in said sum of $5,000 arose, which was said to be as follows: In 1874 the decedent purchased of one Shoemaker certain residence property in Indianapolis, and in part payment therefor she transferred to him a promissory note for $5,000, executed by one Ryan to said Jesse Jones, which note she held [60]*60by endorsement of said Jesse, having purchased it and paid for it with money of her separate estate. Shoemaker conveyed said property to said Louisa, with covenant of warranty against all encumbrances; but, at the time of said conveyance, there was a mortgage on the property of $5,000, made by said Shoemaker to one Gallup; and, as an indemnity against this mortgage, Shoemaker delivered the Ryan note to said Jesse, to be held until said Gallup mortgage, which would be due in July,. 1879, should be paid. The Ryan note was secured by mortgage on certain real estate, and when it became due Ryan had become insolvent, and he conveyed the mortgaged real estate by which it was secured to said Jesse, in payment of the note-so held by Jesse for said Louisa.

Said petition showed how said Jesse, by way of securing his liability thus created to said Louisa, caused said lot 6 to be conveyed to her, how said lot 6 was encumbered as aforesaid, how, to pay and discharge such encumbrance, the loan was made for which said Jesse gave his said note for $2,700,. and he and his said wife executed said mortgage to secure said note. The petition then proceeded as follows: “ Jesse Jones-is not prepared to pay to this estate the balance due from him to it; and, to secure the estate of Mrs. Jones against loss, your petitioner caused said Jesse Jones to execute to him deeds of' conveyance for the following real property,” etc., describing-certain parcels of real estate, being those the conveyance of which by said Jesse to-said executor has before been mentioned,, “which he has received in full payment and satisfaction thereof, subject to the approval of this court; which deeds-your petitioner now exhibits to the court, and prays that, his-actions in the premises may be confirmed,” etc.

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

Related

Coggeshall v. Ruggles
62 Ill. 401 (Illinois Supreme Court, 1872)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
84 Ind. 56, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/foltz-v-hart-ind-1882.