The herald., 1898-11-29
the SUPREME COURT
FOUR DECISIONS RECEIVED AT
DEPUTY CLERKS OFFICE
ABSTRACTS OF THE OPINIONS
Court Nearly Tied on Case of Simons
VS.. Bedell ct al.-Gleason Gets
New Trial

lanes J. Simcns brought an action
against Jane and Otis T. Beden and George
H. Bonebrake, administrator OF the estate
of Jennie r. Simons, deceased, to obtain
Judgment of the court that he was entltled
to certain funds in the hands of the admin
istrator of his deceased wifes estate. lie
nreyailed in the action and defendants ap-
pealed from the judgment in his favor ana
from the order denying motion Tor new
trial.
In dissenting opinion of the supreme
court. which reached this city yesterday,
il is held that it might be argued with some
plausibilty that upon the facts found a
suit might be maintained to cancel the deed
to certain New York property in contro-
yersy, but that the court is unable to COM
prehend any relief to which the plaintiff Is
entitled under those facts in regard to Los
Angeles property. But the majority OF the
supreme court justices discover no error in
the Judgment or order, which are therefore
affirmed.
The decision turned on bare majority of
one, Justices Mcfarland, Harrison, Gar
route and Van Fleet sustaining the dec-
sion of the lower court, while Chief Justice
Beatty and Justices Temple and Henshaw
dissent from such opinion
The findings of the court below were that
Mr.. and Mrs. Bedell were the parents OF
Mrs. Smons, to whom, before her marriage
to her husband, was conveyed lot y OF the
Abbott Kinney tract in Los Angeles for
s25OO. which was paid by Mrs Bedell. There
after, and in contemplation OF her daugh-
ters marriage to Simons, in addition to
whatever right Mrs Simons had derived by
the first deed, Mrs Bedell gave her the lot
and also delivered to her a deed conveying
to her certain real property in New ork
city Of the value OF about $4,000, taking
back mortgage for S2500 on the New York
property to equalize the gifts OF this daugh-
ter with those OF her sister.
Mrs. Simons paid s400 on account of the
mortgage, together with interest to March l.
1893, but died of consumption on April 18th
of that year. Meantime, Simons had deed
ed to his wife certain lots in Block { OF the
Thomas tract in this city. This property
and the lot in the Kinney tract she desired
tc will to her husband before her death and,
at the same time to will the New ork prop
erty to her mother, but this the father OF
Mrs. Simons assured her was unnecessary.
On his advice she decided the New York
property to her mother with the under
standing that Mr.. and Mrs. Bedell would
convey the Los Angeles property to her
husband. This they failed to do; but, as
administrator of his wifes estate, Simons
sold all the Los Angeles property and re-
ceived the consideration paid. Mr. Bone
brake was appointed administrator then,
Simons having resigned his trust, and to
him Simons turned over the funds received
from the sale of the Los Angeles realty.
The action of the court below, awarding
to Simons all the funds in the hands of the
administrator derived from the sale of such
property, deducting first therefrom all
debts allowed against the estate, is sus-
tanned by the majority opinion of the court.
Defendants, on appeal, contended that
there was nothing in the complaint to show
that Mrs Simons intended to and would
have made a valid will bequeatllng to plain
tiff all her interest in the Los Angeles prop
erty, had it not been for the action of her
parents; nor that she would have be-
queathed any part of her property to him
if she had made will. The court holds,
however, that the rule with regard 20
pleading ultimate facts instead of the evil
dence of those facts was not so far violated
as to bring the pleading within the cases
cited and to make it obnoxious to a general
demurrer.
Other objections Of a technical nature are
also disposed of, and the Judgment affirmed
as before stated, by the vote of four to three
of the justices of the court.