Loss v. Winters National Bank & Trust Co.

37 Ohio Law. Abs. 204
Ohio Court of Appeals·Decided August 18, 1942·No. No. 1731·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

[205] OPINION

By GEIGER, PJ.

This matter is before this Court on an appeal from a judgment of the Court of Common Pleas on questions of law and fact. Counsel have agreed that the case may be tried in this Court upon the evidence adduced in the Common Pleas Court as shown by the bill of exceptions.

The transcript of the docket and journal entries shows great activity upon the part of counsel in the filing of numerous motions, none of which has resulted in any question for the consideration of this Court.

In the amended petition the plaintiff, as guardian of the estate of William S. West, alleges that on May 23, 1939, said West was adjudged by the Probate Court of Montgomery County to be mentally incompetent and committed to the Dayton State Hospital; that on the 3rd day of June, plaintiff was appointed his guardian and has duly qualified as such.

For a first cause of action, the plaintiff says that on the 7th day of February, 1939, the said West entered into an agreement of trust with the defendant bank whereby he surrendered to the defendant certain property. Said agreement provided that the defendant was to hold the property as trustee for the benefit of West. The agreement further provided that said trustee should pay the net income to West during his lifetime and for the disposition of the trust fund upon the death of said West. The plaintiff alleges that at the time of the making of the agreement West was of. unsound mind and incapable by reason thereof of making or understanding the same.

A second cause of action is set out which it is not necessary to now note.

The plaintiff prays that upon final hearing the trust agreement may be revoked and the defendant ordered to pay over to the plaintiff, as guardian, the money, bonds, stocks and choses in action which defendant may be hoiclmg as trustee under said trust agreement.

The Bank answered admitting the fact that West had been adjudged mentally incompetent and that the plaintiff had been appointed his guardian. Certain other matters are admitted in reference to the second cause of action which aré not now pertinent. After making the specific denials, a general denial was entered and the prayer is that the petition be dismissed.

The cause came on for trial. Some 35 witnesses were examined resulting in a bill of exceptions exceeding 700 pages.

On March 4, 1942' the judgment of the Court was journalized that the Court upon consideration of the first cause of action finds for the plaintiff and against the defendants and that on February 7, 1939, William S. West was incompetent and by reason thereof incapable of understanding and executing the trust agreement described in the pleadings, and that said trust agreement should be set aside and held for naught.

As to the second cause of action, the Court finds that the same should be dismissed.

A motion for new trial was made and on May 12, 1942, the same was overruled and it was then ordered that the trust agreement be revoked, set aside and held for naught and that the Bank transfer to the plaintiff the money, bonds, stocks, certificates and other choses in action which de[206] fendant is holding as trustee under said agreement.

A bill of exceptions was filed and allowed and the same becomes the evidence in this Court.

Beside the lengthy bill of exceptions we find briefs which, in the aggregate, amount to 140 pages.

The Court has been at great labor in reading the testimony in this case. The question at issue is simple; whether or not Mr. West, on February 7th, 1939, had sufficient fental capacity to enter into the contract by which he made the Winters National Bank his trustee, and provided for the distribution of the income of his property during his lifetime and the final disposition of the corpus of the estate after his death. The action is that of the guardian seeking to set aside the contract on account of lack of capacity. The evidence in chief of the guardian covers nearly 400 pages, and that of the defendant, 300 pages with rebuttal of 25 pages. The case furnishes >a very apt example of a trial which should have been confined within reasonable bounds, but which extends in needless detail over inconsequential incidents and repetitious examination, the final purpose of which was to enlighten the Court on the ward’s condition on the 7th day of February, 1939. It will be impossible for the Court to comment in detail on the testimony adduced, although we have read all of it. Counsel for each side presented a summary of the evidence as each interprets it, in several hypothetical questions propounded to physicians well qualified to give an opinion. Some of these hypothetical questions may be found on pages 284, 294, 300, 313, 350, 356 of the plaintiff’s testimony and at various pages of the defendant’s testimony. An elaborate analysis of the insanity from which the ward suffered, by Dr. Fischbein, is found (Record) pages 543-592. Also Dr. Sagebiei (Record) pages 620-686 and 691, et seq.

There does not seem to be a great deal of difference in the testimony as to the circumstances surrounding the life of the ward prior to the appointment of the guardian, and without any pretense that the summation of the plaintiff’s or defendant’s testimony presents a complete picture, the Court is of the opinion that the evidence of the plaintiff discloses that the ward, a colored man, about sixty years of age, was, during his active life as a laborer, an exceptionally skilled and highly paid cement finisher. As such he had worked both in Dayton and other points to which he was taken by contractors. In his normal days he was exceedingly cautious about money matters, and was not a spendthrift, a drinker, nor one who resorted to any extravagances. He was an exceptionally faithful worker, and. his actions beyond the scope of his employment were above reproach.

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

Loss v. Winters National Bank & Trust Co., 37 Ohio Law. Abs. 204 (Ohio Ct. App. 1942).

37 Ohio Law. Abs. 204 (Loss v. Winters National Bank & Trust Co.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Coburn v. Auto-Owners Insurance
938 N.E.2d 400 (Ohio Court of Appeals, 2010)
Shupp v. Farrar
88 N.E.2d 924 (Ohio Court of Appeals, 1949)