Evening times-Republican. [volume] (Marshalltown, Iowa) 1890-1923, 1912-02-17
IMPORTANT RULING.
Supreme Court Holds Nsuss's Actions
Fully Justified.

above case, which opinion probabl,
finally disposes Of this litigation. The
opinion Is by Weaver, Justice, and re-
| verses Hon. C. G. Lee, judge, upon al
the propositions involved in the case
The opinion is extensive and exhaust
I i've, and fully sustainS the contention
made in the lower court by Boardmar
& Lawrence. that Neuse had no right
to refuse to deliver the property to
Dannenbrink until guardian had been
appointed.
| The opinion states, after considering
the facts:-"Without extending this
opinion for more minute statement
Of the facts we have to express the
! opinion that the application for new
| trial should have been granted. we
| reach this conclusion the more readily
| because CT the very grave doubt which
reading Of the record leaves In our
| minds of the sufficiency of the evil
dence to sustain the decree. Indeed.
looking at the record without any ref
erence to the showing in support of
the application for new trial, it is our
opinion that no case was made for the
! recovery of the sum of $4,000 realized
upon one Of the sales of the Dannen-
brink land and if this were the only
matter Of dispute We should have to
enter reversal upon the merits The
other item Of $4,000 represented by a
certificate Of deposit together with a
few promissory notes presents more
difficulty chiefly because the history
of these securities was not clearly
traced from the date of defendants all
legged delivery of them to Dannen-
loft (
ference that defendant had in some
way obtained or enjoyed the benefit
thereof. The showing made upon the
petition for new trial fairly fills this
gap and if upon a retrial that show
quite inevitable"
The opinion further states. with ref
erence to the right Of Neuse' to deliver
the property to Dannenbrink, as fol-
lows:
That the court and the parties in
interest may not be misled upon re-
trial it is essential that We give at
tention to rule Of law which appears
to be affirmed Ii the opinion which
accompanies the decree. 1t is there
said in substance with reference to the
defendants claim of having surren-
dered the certificate and notes to
Dannenbrink before the appointments
Of guardian. that even if this he true
yet Dannenbrirk being incompetent, a
delivery to him will constitute no de-
Tense to plaintiffs demand We think
this proposition of law can not be ap-
proved. Up to the entry of judgment
finding him incompetent ana appoint
Ing guardian Dannenbrink was pre-
sumably competent to do business, the
title to the securities was in him and
II he demanded possession Of them de-
PENDANT could not rightfully refuse toI
deliver them. If he demanded and re-
ceived them and collected the money on
them it was his money until at least
the time when his legal title was d.
vested by the appointment of a guard
ian, and if he secreted the money or
refused to deliver it on demand Of the
guardian we think there is no rule Of
law or equity which gives the guardian
recourse upon the bailee who had sur
rendered the property to the bailor at
time when no person possessed the
legal right to forbid it, If the defend
ant was setting up any claim of title
in himself to any part Of this property
it would of course be pertinent upon
the question of his good faith to show
that he obtained 1t knowing Of the
tendency OF the proceedings for ap-
pointment OF a guardian, but ne makes
no such claim, and he is sought to be
held accountable not because he con-
verified it to his own use but because he
delieverd to the owner who had the
undisputa BILE right to demand and re-
ceive It,"
The supreme court further holds that
Sophia Mccoy was bound by the acts
of Dannenbrink. using the following
language:
$50 far as the evidence in the main
case is concerned there is no showing
of any kind that the guardian ever
asked Dannenbrink for the money or
made search or effort to find It. In
three months from the date Of the
guardians appointment his aorlira-
ton to be discharged was granted and
no successor was appointed. This
amounted to am abandonment of the
guardianship proceedings and Dam
nenbrink was left in the legal posses
sion and control Of whatever property
remained to him.
'Tf. upon being freed from the guard
ianship he had himself sued defendant
to recover the amount Of the certificate
and notes and defendant had pleaded
and proved their delivery and return as
shown in this case. no court would for
minute entertain the proposition
that this was not a complete defense.
"Plaintiff as the alleged heir at law
comes into court with no higher or
better right of recovery than would
have belonged to Dannenbrink himself
were he still living and himself prose-
cutting the claim"
The supreme court then reverses the
case and reanands it for further pro-
ceedings in harmony with its opinion.
Boardman & Lawrence are very
much gratified with the conclusions
Of the supreme court thus confirming
the stand taken by them in the lower
court, that until guardian was ap-
pointed Mr. Neuse had no right to re-
fuse to deliver to Dannenbrink his
property, and that the action Of the
trial court in rendering Judgment
against Neuse for ss,200.45, with in