Bentley v. Bentley

Boyd, O. J., delivered the opinion of the Court. Miss Harriet S. Bentley lived on a farm in Howard County, Md., a few miles from Laurel. The value of the farm, which contained about 141 acres, is not definitely shown in the record, but Miss Bentley acquired a half in ⁴²⁹ terest in it on August 12th, 1910, and on November 19th, 1918, after some proceedings in court, she acquired title to the whole of it, and gave a mortgage of that elate on it to Janies W. Travers for $3,000 — taking up a prior mortgage which he held ou it. As far as the exhibits-, etc., in the record indicate, the farm was apparently valued at about six thousand dollars in 1918.

On the 25th of June, 1919, Miss Bentley made a deed of trust to James W. Travers, trustee, by which she conveyed and assigned all the property she had, including the farm and personal property, in trust for him to- manage! the same and co-llect the income therefrom and, -after paying all taxes, fixed charges and expenses, to pay the net, income to her for her natural life, and after her death the trust to “close,” and all the property “to he paid over, deeded, or transferred in whatever manner may he necessary and proper, by said James W. Travers-, trustee, to Frank H. Bentley, absolutely.” Miss Bentley died on July 22nd, 1920, leaving surviving her two- brothers, Benjamin A. and' Frank TL Bentley, and two nieces and a nephew, children of her brother Charles, who had predeceased her. On June 17th, 1921, Benjamin A. Bentley filed a bill of complaint against Frank IT. Bentley and James W. Travers as trustee and in his individual capacity, alleging that the-deed of trust had been obtained through and by “duress, fraud and undue influence exercised and practiced upon” Miss Bentley, and praying that it be “annulled, set aside and held for naught,” and that James W. Travers be required to* render an account of all things received, had or done in connection with his supposed -trusteeship. The lower court on March 28th, 1922, p-assed a decree setting aside the deed and declaring it to he utterly null and void, requiring the trustee forthwith to return to that court an account, and ordering the defendants to pay the costs.

From that decree this appeal was taken by Frank H. Bentley. Miss Bentley was about seventy-eight years of age when she made the deed of trust. The evidence is conflicting as ⁴³⁰ to her mental condition, although physically she was infirm for some time prior to the execution of the deed of trust. Forty exceptions were filed by the plaintiff to questions and answers asked witnesses by the defendants relating to her mental condition, and if we were required to pass on them we would be compelled to hold that the most of them were well taken, as laymen in most of the instances, expressed opinions as to her mental capacity without there being such foundations laid- as are required by our decisions.

The lower court did not pass on the exceptions, but decided the case on other grounds regardless of them, and hence we will not do more than say that there was little or no probative force in the testimony of the lay witnesses on either side as to the mental condition of Miss Bentley, if we consider all of it, although there were no exceptions filed by the defendants. The testimony of Dr. Linthicum, the only physician examined, shows that he had not seen her professionally for about two years before the deed of trust was made, and if he saw her at all during that time, neither the time nor the circumstances are given. His evidence is not of much aid to the court in reaching a conclusion, as it does not show "whether or not she was in such a condition as she might have been easily influenced. There are a few prominent facts which are determinative of the case.

When the record is stripped of immaterial matters and some evidence on both sides as to- her mental condition, we find an old lady- seventy-seven or seventy-eight years of age possessed of a farm, subject to a mortgage of probably something like half its value, and some personal property, the amount or value of which is not shown. She had two brothers., two nieces and a nephew, children of a deceased brother, who survived her. One brother, the plaintiff, had formerly lived in Maryland, but was staying with his daughter in Washington, D. C., in 1918, when he was called by some one over the telephone to go to his sister, Miss Bentley, who was sick. He went there the first of ⁴³¹ May, 1918, and remained until the fifteenth of September, 1919.

He was evidently a man of small means, and made and sold brooms for a living. He testified as to a number of peculiar things she did, but we will not state them, as they do not throw much, if any, light on the case. Frank H. Bentley lived about a mile from bis sister’s place. Before the plaintiff went there, he would take butter and eggs to market for her, and the plaintiff testified that bis brother attended to business for lier.

He said that he and his brother talked about the condition of their sister’s mind, and he told his brother “there ought to be a guardian put over her.” He replied, “I know that, it ought to have been done five years ago.” He was asked if he said anything else, and answered: “Well, 1 asked him if be wanted to go with me and have a. guardian appointed. He never said whether he would or would not. He said it would make the family mad. I told him there was no other family hut me and him and brother Charlie’s children.” That was in 1918., Miss Hattie E. Bentley, a daughter of the plaintiff, testified that her I hide Frank said in their store, the latter part of the summer or early fall of 1917, that her aunt ought to have a guardian.

Mrs. Sarah Jackson, an aunt by marriage of Benjamin and Frank Bentley, testified tliat Frank told her in 1917 that his sister was unable to do business., and when she was at Miss Bentley’s in August, 1919, she told her that she did not know what she was signing when sho signed the deed of trust. Frank IT. Bentley said his brother, Benjamin, talked with him on one occasion about having; a guardian appointed for her, “and I said, you want to make her good and mad, you just mention it to- her.” He said he did not remember telling his niece about having a guardian appointed. There is no doubt that for some reason Alias Bentley did not feel very kindly towards her brother, Benjamin, although he spent more time with her than any other relative the latter part of her life, up to September, .1919.

That she was ⁴³² feeble and needed assistance in 1918, 1919 and until her death, cannot be successfully denied, but in October, 1919, Mr. and Mrs. Carr moved into her place. The evidence of the two defendants is sufficient to show that they did, consciously or unconsciously, influence Miss Bentley to do whát she did do in reference to the deed of trust. Frank H. Bentley testified that as he went to market to- do her shopping, she called him in the house, “and wanted to know what she could do to.keep brother Ben from disposing of everything on the place. I said, well, I will do anything I can for you.

Mr. Travers was suggested because he had a mortgage on the place. I suggested Mr. Travers be appointed trustee, and she said that was all right, and- she said for me to- tell him to come up. As far as the disposition of the property, I never mentioned such a thing.” It is asking a great deal of the court, to conclude from what appears in the record, that he did not know that ho had been made a beneficiary in the deed of trust until he went up to Ellicott City some time later, the exact time not being shown. Miss Bentley was taken to- his house, away from her own home where Benjamin.

Bentley, her other brother, was staying, to execute the deed. When it was being-read to her and she executed it, her brother, Frank, remained outside of the house. What possible reason could there have been for having him excluded, if. he was not to be made a beneficiary ? Mr. Donovan, who drew the deed, testified that the message for him to go to see Miss Bentley came to him by telephone from Frank Bentley’s place.

Frank Bentley was asked, on direct examination, “When did you learn that you were the beneficiary under that deed of trust ?” and replied : “Well, when Mr. Donovan came .out, and said it is customary to present the pen to the beneficiary, I present this pen to you, Mr. Bentley.” Anyone of ordinary intelligence would have known from that that he had been made the. beneficiary, or at least would have made some inquiry about it when the pen was given to him. Mr. Donovan must ⁴³³ have either known, or have assumed that he did know he had been. If Frank Bentley did not know what was in the deed, he ought to> have known it, as. he says he was acting; for his sister, had sent for Mr. Donovan, and had seen Mr. Travers about acting as trustee. It would have been inexcusable for him not to know what disposition his sister was making of her property, when she was relying on him to have it attended to, and it would be difficult to understand why an attorney would not, under the circumstances, have informed him, unless he assumed that he already knew, as Mr. Donovan must have known, when he gave him the pen with the remark quoted.

Frank Bentley admitted, on cross-examination, that he had written to Mrs. O’Brien, his niece, who lives in New York State, in reply to inquiries about her aunt’s property, “Ben has been living with sister Hattie for more than a year, and treated her badly that I went before the court and had a trustee and guardian appointed to look after her.” He did not tell her that the property went to him 'after his sister’s death, or give her any definite information about, it. In point of fact, he had not had a trustee or guardian appointed by the court, and he knew that. Mr. Travers testified that Mr. Frank Bentley spoke to him at Laurel of his sister’s “condition, and the people taking advantage of her,” and asked him if he would be trustee and look after her affairs. He said he asked him why he would not, and “he said he would rather somebody disinterested take care of it.

I said I wouldn’t do it unless Miss Hattie was willing.” A day or two afterwards Mr. Travers went to her house, and asked her about it, and she said she was willing for him to take care of her matters, that “I then told Mr. Frank Bentley, and lie said J will get Mr. Donovan to draw the papers up. lie said you can take her