Teats v. Flanders

24 S.W. 126, 118 Mo. 660, 1893 Mo. LEXIS 189
CourtSupreme Court of Missouri
DecidedDecember 16, 1893
StatusPublished
Cited by23 cases

This text of 24 S.W. 126 (Teats v. Flanders) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Missouri primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Teats v. Flanders, 24 S.W. 126, 118 Mo. 660, 1893 Mo. LEXIS 189 (Mo. 1893).

Opinion

GrANTT, P. J.

This is a suit in equity, for specific performance of an alleged agreement by Mrs. Velveria Flanders, to leave all of her property at her death to Mrs. Teats, in consideration of services rendered.

The petition is material to a proper understanding of the issues involved. It alleges: ‘.‘That plaintiffs are now and have been husband and wife since the -day of-18 — . That on of about the-day of-1865, Nancy 0. Teats came to the city of St. Joseph, Missouri, at the age of fifteen years, and her name was then Nancy C. Martin; that she was poor and had to support herself. That she then and there met and agreed with Richard M. Flanders and Velveria Flanders, his wife, in the city of St. Joseph. Said agreement between said parties was in substance as follows, to-wit: That said Nancy C. Martin was to go to the home and house of said Richard M. and Velveria Flanders, who then had no children, and to live with them as their child,, doing and serving them as their child, with the promise and agreement that they would legally adopt her as their child. That in pursuance of said agreement she went immediately to their house as such child, with the full knowledge and consent of said parties, and entered into said relation, discharging all her duties as their child with the full understanding of all of said parties that she was to be so adopted, and at. their death she was to receive and inherit all their property. And she continued to reside, and discharge all her duties as such child, such as working in and around their said home, doing cooking, sweeping, sewing, general household duties, and bestowing upon them a child’s affections to their entire satisfaction and in full compliance of. their said agreement until about the-day of.-1867, when said Richard M. Flan-, ders died at said city, leaving no children. That said [664]*664female plaintiff from said day continued to reside with said Velveria Flanders as her child, under the other and further agreement between said Velveria Flanders and said female plaintiff, that she was to continue to so reside and act with her in the relation as aforesaid, and at her death she was to receive and inherit all of said Velveria Flanders’ property. That she did continue to so reside with her, said Velveria Flanders, under the agreement made with her after the death of her said husband, doing and performing the things and work for her in like manner.as she did before his said death, and as hereinbefore stated, until about the -— day of-187 — , when she was married to plaintiff, Charles Teats, which said marriage was contracted and entered into with the full knowledge and consent of said Velveria Flanders. The plaintiffs then, with the consent of Velveria Flanders, went to live by themselves. That afterwards said Velveria Flanders requested plaintiffs to come to her house in St. Joseph and take care of her during her >old days. That in compliance with said request, they resided with her and took care of her for about five years, discharging all of said duties as her said child, with the further promise that she, the female plaintiff, at the death of said Velveria Flanders was to receive all of her property. That said Flanders, during all of said time received and accepted her said work and services under said agreement. That plaintiff, relying upon and believing she had been so adopted as such child by said Velveria Flanders, continued to work and perform her said duties as aforesaid, and received nothing for said labor except her board and clothes, to the entire satisfaction of said Flanders. That defendants knew of the relation, and well understood that this female plaintiff was to so inherit their said property. That Velveria Flanders died about 1889, intestate, at the city of St. Joseph, [665]*665leaving as her only collateral kindred and heirs at law these defendants. That the said female plaintiff did not know or find out that she was not regularly and legally adopted as their said child until after their •death in 1889, but expected at that time that she would receive all of her said property. That said Yelveria Flanders at her' death was seized of the following '•described real estate, to-wit: Lot 5, block 67, in Patee’s addition to St. Joseph, Buchanan county, Missouri, and personal property after paying all of the debts of said estate, amounting to $3,000, which is now in the hands of Abner T. Kneeland, defendant, who administered upon the estate of said Yelveria Flanders. Wherefore plaintiffs pray the court to declare specific performance of said agreement and to that end that all right, title, interest and estate in and to said real •estate which the said Yelveria Flanders had at the time •of her death, and which vested in defendants as heirs at law of said Yelveria Flanders' to be divested out of them and that the same be vested in the plaintiff, Nancy C. Teats, and that the rights of said plaintiff to the personal estate of said deceased and remaining in the hands of said administrator be declared and established, and the rights of said plaintiffs in and to said estate be established as fully to all intents and purposes as though she had been formally and lawfully adopted as a child and heir at law of said deceased, and for all other proper relief.”

The answer, ommitting caption, is as follows:

“Now come the .defendants, and for answer to plaintiff’s petition herein deny each and every allegation therein contained.

, “The defendants for further answer and defense to the said petition of the said plaintiff and to the pretended cause of action therein stated, state that said pretended contract in said plaintiffs’ petition declared [666]*666upon was not to be performed within one year next after the alleged mating thereof, nor was the same nor any memorandum or note thereof reduced to writing and signed by the said Richard M. Flanders and Yelveria Flanders or either of them, nor by any other person for them or either of them thereto lawfully authorized. Therefore defendants say that said pretended contract is within the statute of frauds and void. The defendants having fully answered, asked to be hence dismissed with their cost in this behalf expended.”

The defendant, Sophia Flanders, was the sister of the deceased, Mrs. Yelveria Flanders, and Abner T. Kneeland was her nephew, and they are her only heirs at law, and Kneeland is also her administrator.

The undisputed facts are about as follows: In 1865 Richard M. Flanders and his wife Yelveria, were residing in St. Joseph; they had no children, and about that time toot Nancy Martin, then a girl fifteen years old, without home or friends, to live with them, sent her to school and supported her. There is some evidence in the' record that Flanders in his lifetime expressed an intention of adopting the girl, but not in her presence. -Richard Flanders died in 1867. In 1868, after his death, Nancy left Mrs. Flanders, and went to live at Mr. Whitehead’s in St. Joseph for a year, and then went to Kansas where she resided for about three' years, and there married her coplaintiff, Chai-les Teats.

In 1871 or 1872, she and her husband came back to St. Joseph and lived in one room of Mrs. Flanders’ house, which they occupied, rent free, for about two years, and then moved away, and never afterwards lived with, or rendered Mrs. Flanders any service. Mrs. Flanders continued to reside in her home by herself most of the time, but at different times had tenants in a portion of her residence. In 1888 Mrs. Flanders [667]*667became insane and was sent to the asylum, where she died.

There was much evidence to the effect that Mrs.

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

Related

Wohlgemuth v. Browning
384 S.W.2d 820 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 1964)
Rosenberg v. Steiner
228 S.W.2d 806 (Supreme Court of Missouri, 1950)
Benjamin v. Cronan
93 S.W.2d 975 (Supreme Court of Missouri, 1936)
Lynch v. Missouri-Kansas-Texas Railroad
61 S.W.2d 918 (Supreme Court of Missouri, 1933)
Edmonds v. Scharff
213 S.W. 823 (Supreme Court of Missouri, 1919)
Lieber v. Lieber
143 S.W. 458 (Supreme Court of Missouri, 1911)
Hood v. McGehee
189 F. 205 (U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Northern Alabama, 1911)
Beach v. Bryan
133 S.W. 635 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 1911)
Bishop v. Brittain Investment Co.
129 S.W. 668 (Supreme Court of Missouri, 1910)
Griffin v. Nicholas
123 S.W. 1063 (Supreme Court of Missouri, 1909)
Smith v. Smith
100 S.W. 579 (Supreme Court of Missouri, 1907)
Hall v. Getman
97 S.W. 607 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 1906)
Fugate v. Allen
95 S.W. 980 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 1906)
Jenkins v. Emmons
94 S.W. 812 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 1906)
Asbury v. Hicklin
81 S.W. 390 (Supreme Court of Missouri, 1904)
Kersey v. O'Day
73 S.W. 481 (Supreme Court of Missouri, 1903)
Kinney v. Murray
71 S.W. 197 (Supreme Court of Missouri, 1902)
Patton v. Fox
69 S.W. 287 (Supreme Court of Missouri, 1902)
Steele v. Steele
61 S.W. 815 (Supreme Court of Missouri, 1901)
Rice v. Shipley
60 S.W. 740 (Supreme Court of Missouri, 1901)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
24 S.W. 126, 118 Mo. 660, 1893 Mo. LEXIS 189, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/teats-v-flanders-mo-1893.