Showalter v. Hampton

1923 OK 1052, 223 P. 167, 101 Okla. 83, 1923 Okla. LEXIS 12
CourtSupreme Court of Oklahoma
DecidedNovember 27, 1923
Docket14407
StatusPublished
Cited by4 cases

This text of 1923 OK 1052 (Showalter v. Hampton) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Oklahoma primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Showalter v. Hampton, 1923 OK 1052, 223 P. 167, 101 Okla. 83, 1923 Okla. LEXIS 12 (Okla. 1923).

Opinion

KENNAMER, J.

Clara Showalter was appointed guardian of Georgia Valliere,' now Hampton, by the probate court of Ottawa county, Okla., in the year 1915. Said guardian and her -ward are members of the Quapaw Tribe of Indians. Clara Showalter. on the date of her appoint^ ment as guardian, was an unrestricted Indian, having been declared competent to attend to her business affairs by the Secretary of the Interior. Georgia Valliere, for whom she was appointed guardian, was an incompetent Indian and restricted. It appears that on the date of the appointment of Clara Showalter as guardian of Georgia Valliere. her minor sister, eacih owned an undivided one-sixtli interest in the allotment of Mary Calf, deceased, Qúapaw allottee, and each an undivided one-twelfth interest in the allotment of Thomas Buffalo, deceased, Quapaw allottee.

Prior to the appointment of Clara Showalter as guardian of her sister, a mining-lease contract upon their interest in the two allotments had boon executed by one *84 H. W. Woodard, acting as guardian for Clara Showalter while she was a minor and Georgia Valliere. The record further shows that in the year 1917 Clara Showalter, for herself and as guardian of Georgia Valliere, pursuant to an order of the county court, executed a mining lease on their interest in the Mary J. Calf allotment to the Welch Mining Company and she also executed the lease on behalf of other brothers and sisters as guardian, now not involved in this case. Prior to the execution of this lease the Secretary of the Interior, under the provision of the act of Congress approved'June 7, 1897, (30 U. S. Stats. at L. 72), had withdrawn from Georgia Valliere the right to lease her interest for mining purposes and a lease affecting her interest in the inherited lands must be made under the direction and approval of the Secretary of the Interior according to the rules and regulations promulgated by him on April 7, 1917.

All the leases affecting the interest of the guardian and her ward in the allotments were transferred to L. S. Skelton and Skelton Lead & Zinc Company under the approval of the county court, and the leases were submitted to the Secretary of Interior by said company for approval. Upon a hearing the Secretary adjudged and decreed the leases to be void; whereupon the Skelton Lead & Zinc Company applied to the Secretary of the Interior for a new and approved lease upon the interest of the guardian and her ward and . other heirs' interested in the allotments. The Secretary of the Interior prepared new leases and forwarded them to the , Suijerintendent, of the Quapaw Indian Agency at Miami to bo executed by all the interested heirs, and when the Superintendent of the Quapaw Agency received said leases he sent out notices or letters to all the heirs to come to his office on the 9th day of July, 1920, for the purpose of executing the leases. Clara Showalter received one of these letters directing her to come and sign t.hp leases individually and to obtain an order from the county court of Ottawa county authorizing her to sigh as guardian for her ward, Georgia Valliere. There is no conflict in the evidence to the effect that Clara Showalter, after receiving this notice, called at Superintendent’s office on the 9th day of July and refused to sign the leases either in her individual capacity or as guardian and refused to take any steps to obtain an order from the county court of Ottawa county authorizing her as guardian to sign these leases at that time.

On the 21st day of July, 3 920, Clara Showalter entered into a contract with the Skelton Lead & Zinc Company through Doctor Skelton, whereby said company agreed to pay her the sum of $40,000 after she had executed the leases and the samo had been approved by the Secretary of the Interior. On the next day, after she had executed this contract, she, as guardian, appeared in tne county court of Ottawa county, filed a petition, and obtained an order of said court authorizing her to execute the leases as guardian, and, after ob‘ taining said order, on the same date sho appeared at the office of the superintendent and executed the leases to L. S. Skelton individually and as guardian for her ward. Georgia Valliere. When she filed her fb nal report in the county court, on the 15th day of July, 3921, as guardian of Georgia Valliere, now Hampton, she reported she had on hand due her ward the sum of $11,-343.33, consisting of United States Liberty Bonds and cash in the bank, but nowhere in her report did she charge herself with any part of the $40,000 received in the settlement made with Doctor Slselton and demanded by her before she executed the leases for herself and as guardian of her ward on the 22nd day of July, 3920.

Georgia Valliere Hampton filed exceptions to the report in which she asks that Clara Showalter, her guardian, be charged with $15,000, which represents one-half of the $40,000 collected by Clara Showalter in the settlement made with Dr. Skelton at the time of the signing of the leases less $10,000 paid by her for the services of attorneys representing her in the settlement. The county court sustained the contention of Georgia Valliere Hampton and surcharged the guardian with the $15,000. Clara Showalter appealed from the order of the county court settling her acoountf( as guardian to the district court, and the case was tried de novo in said court and judgment entered on the 3rd day of January. 3923, affirming the judgment of the county court.

Clara Showalter filed motion for new trial, which was by the court overruled, and this appeal is prosecuted to reverse the judgment of the district court.

It isi contended b'y counsel for Clara Showalter that on the 21st day of July, 1920, when Clara Showalter entered into-the contract with .the Skelton Jjead & Zinc Company for the payment of $40,000 to her, the leases having been sent to the Superintendent of the Quapaw Indian Agency for execution, the only consideration for the payment of this money was the settlement of a controversy between the Skelton Lead & Zinc Company and Clara Showalter individually, wherein Clara Showalter *85 was to receive the money in full satisfaction of any claim she might have against the Skelton Lead & Zinc Company for damages in mining for zinc upon' her interest in the allotments of Mary ,T. Calf and Thomas Buffalo undter void leases, and that no part of the money was paid to Clara Showalter for her ward, Georgia Yalliere Hampton, and that the matter of leasing the interest of Georgia Valliere Hampton in' the lands was wholly within the power and jurisdiction of the Secretary of the Interior under the following provision of the act of June 7, 1897:

“That the allottees of land within the limits of the Quapaw Agency, Indian Territory, are hereby authorized to lease their lands or any part thereof for a term not exceeding three years for farming or grazing purposes, or ten years for mining or business purposes, and said allottees and their lessees and tenants shall have the right to employ such assistants, laborers, and help from time to time as they may deem necessary; provided, that whenever it shall be made to appear to the Secretary of the Interior that by reason of age or disability any such allottee cannot improve or manage his allotment properly and with benefit to himself, the same may be leased in the discretion of thet Secretary upon such terms and conditions as shall be prescribed liv him.” (30 U. S. Stats. at Large, 72.)

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

Related

Del E. Webb Realty & Management Co. v. Wessbecker
628 P.2d 114 (Colorado Court of Appeals, 1980)
Bruce v. Globe Indemnity Co.
9 F. Supp. 761 (N.D. Oklahoma, 1935)
Showalter v. Hampton
26 F.2d 777 (Eighth Circuit, 1928)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
1923 OK 1052, 223 P. 167, 101 Okla. 83, 1923 Okla. LEXIS 12, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/showalter-v-hampton-okla-1923.