Jaap v. Digman

36 N.E. 50, 8 Ind. App. 509, 1894 Ind. App. LEXIS 318
Indiana Court of Appeals·Decided January 4, 1894·No. No. 999·Published

Opinion

Ross, J.

The appellee James Digman brought this action in the court below, against the appellant, to set aside the approval of the report of appellant as administrator of the estate of the appellee James Digman, an absent person, and to require an accounting to him for his property.

There is but one question presented by the record, which is argued by counsel, which will be considered on this appeal, and that question is as to the sufficiency of the facts stated in the complaint to constitute a cause of action.

The complaint, which is in two paragraphs, is as follows:

“James Digman complains of George Jaap, Mary Jaap, James D. White and J. E. K. France, and says that said Mary Jaap is his sister and said George Jaap is her husband; that this plaintiff’s father, Phillip Digman, died in 1865, leaving a small estate in this county; that Elizabeth Digman, this plaintiff’s mother, said Mary, and this plaintiff were his only heirs; that said Elizabeth, shortly after the death of her said husband, became insane, and so continued until her death, in 1889, and was confined in either the State asylum or the county asylum during that period; that because of the death of their father and the insanity of their mother, this plaintiff was taken to the Catholic Orphan Asylum at Rensselaer, Indiana, when but a small child, and, having no home, he worked for such people and at such places as he could find employment, mostly in this State, from that time until now; that said Jaap wrongfully and wickedly conceived the idea of cheating and defrauding this plaintiff out of the little property left him by his father and the interest he might have in his mother’s estate; that to more speedily accomplish that purpose they did, on the 10th day of January, 1887, file a petition in this court, [511] ill which, they falsely and fraudulently represented to this court that the estate belonging to this plaintiff was going to waste, and that they had had no knowledge of his whereabouts since November, 1872, when in truth and' in fact they knew that he was alive, and were informed where he could be found; that by reason of such fraudulent and false representations, they did procure an order from this court finding that this plaintiff was dead, and letters of administration were granted on liis estate, to said George Jaap, and his said codefendants, James B. White and J. E. K. France, became and were his bondsmen as such administrator; that said bond has been lost, so that a copy of said bond can not be filed herewith; that this plaintiff does not know what property came into the hands of said Jaap, but is informed and believes that he received over twelve hundred dollars ($1,200), in property and money, belonging to this plaintiff, which he wrongfully and unlawfully converted to his own use and to the use of himself and said Mary Jaap; that to carry out said scheme, he caused the publication to be made in the Indianapolis Sentinel and in the Fort Wayne Dispatch, well knowing that this plaintiff would never hear or know of the same, when in truth and in fact he knew, or could have found out, from information he then had, just where this plaintiff was; that on the 16th day of April, 1888, said Jaap filed a pretended final report, in which he set forth that this plaintiff was deceased, and that said Mary Jaap was entitled, as the sister of this plaintiff, to one-half of.his estate, and that said George Jaap, as the guardian of the said Elizabeth Digman, was entitled to the other half; that he took and kept for his own use, for his pretended services in so defrauding this plaintiff, the sum of thirty dollars ($30), and that he paid out fifty dollars ($50) of other costs and expenses wholly unnecessary and wrong[512] fully; that in December, 1888, said Jaap made such representations to this court as to the death and decease of this plaintiff, and to his having given notice thereof, that this court did approve of said final report, and discharged said Jaap from further acting as such administrator; and the plaintiff avers that all the acts done by said Jaap were fraudulent and void as to this plaintiff, and that the representations made by him to procure the same were false, and known by him to be so at the time when made, and that they should all be set aside; that said James B. White and J. E. K. France, in the execution of said bond, wrongfully combined and conspired and made it possible for said George Jaap and Mary Jaap to commit said fraud on this plaintiff, well knowing that such proceedings were not authorized by law, and that the same were wrongful, fraudulent and void as to this plaintiff; that this plaintiff knew nothing of any of said proceedings until within the last six weeks, and never surmised that said defendants were doing or had done any of said acts.
“Wherefore this plaintiff asks that the approval of all reports and acts done by said George Jaap be set aside and declared fraudulent and void, and that he have judgment for two thousand dollars ($2,000) against all of said defendants, and that said judgment be declared to be without relief from valuation and appraisement laws, and all homestead and exemption laws, and for all other proper and equitable relief.”

For a second cause of action, the plaintiff says:

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

Jaap v. Digman, 36 N.E. 50, 8 Ind. App. 509, 1894 Ind. App. LEXIS 318 (Ind. Ct. App. 1894).

36 N.E. 50 (Jaap v. Digman) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Pate v. Moore
79 Ind. 20 (Indiana Supreme Court, 1881)
Carver v. Lewis
2 N.E. 714 (Indiana Supreme Court, 1885)
Wainwright v. Smith
6 N.E. 333 (Indiana Supreme Court, 1886)
Castetter v. State ex rel. Bradburn
14 N.E. 388 (Indiana Supreme Court, 1887)
Pollard v. Barkley
17 N.E. 294 (Indiana Supreme Court, 1888)