Grand Forks herald. [volume] (Grand Forks, N.D.) 1916-1955, 1919-07-05
continued in Monday
Evenings Herald.
Supreme Court Decisions

EnoNN Nelson COuItys
1.ureas ]. Wehe, plaintiff ano npnrnd-
liant. VS.. Arthur G, Wene: uTnI;sSo
ant and respondent, ana Hsr.
p, Wehe. Laureas j. NIi uahe
bert C. Wehe, Charles - ~
gpav formerly Blanche H. Wene,.
Mande L. stansberry, formeriy
,, M.nde b. Wehe, Alice G. Wene'
az al. defendants and appel!ants;
Syllabus: /. A deed from huspano
l.o wife Of a statutory homestead y
,,ssaI ia valid although the wife ald
not concur and join in the
thereof, pursuant to the law then OK
>. In an action to determine adverse
claims where it appears that IN april
1891, the father decided the lanu ~.
lyolyed to his wife in 70 protsst
his home and save the land IRON az.
|mands Of creditors, although II VIZ
unnecessary for him so to 90 oy ~.
son of the land being a statutory
homestead and therefore exempt Irol..
the claims of the creditors, and, WneIo
line father thereafter a%cquiesced IN
such convent ce and made no attempt
to secure re-conveyance until 1910
after his wife had died, it is held mat
lin equity no trust Of any III o
and the father is not in a position 70
claim re-conveyance.
5. In such action, where the father
after such conveyance to MS VIE IN
1881 farmed and occupied the prem
ises until 1895 and thereafter remoV..
ed from the same but managed n
icontrolled the land through tenants
and generally paid the taxes thereon
until the year 1913, and in other ways
treated the farm as his own. 1t is helo
that such acts were not hostile to the
title of the wife and do not Nnstltute
acts of adverse possession.
a., In, such action, where the wife.
who had received such deed, made a
will in October, 1913, devising a leg
acy of s. 100000 to each of her three
children with a. division Of the residue
lof her estate among her remaining
children, share and share alike, and.
where, on the day following. she exc
cuted q deed, absolute in form, con-
veying the land involved. being the
entire property possessed by her, to
the three children named as legatees
in the will and thereafter in February.
1914. again made a will containing
the same terms and, where it appears
that the reason for the execution of
such deed was that the mother fear
ed than at attempt might be made to
break the will, and, where, further,
it was the understanding that the
property should belong to the mother
until her death and that the persons
designated as grantees in the deed
should carry out the intention Of the
mother in the will in the devises
THEREIN made, it is held that such deed
imposed a constructive trust upon the
grantees named to carry out the in
~tention of the mother as expressed by
her III the will and that the will is a
memorandum in writing Of the terms
of such trust.
Action to determine adverse claims:
from a judgment in favor Of the de-
PENDANT, Arthur c. Wehe. the plain.
tiff and the other children Of the de-
ceased mother appeal, and demand a
trial de novo.
Reversed and remanded for further
proceedings.
Opinion Of the court by Bronson, J.
Robinson, j. concurs specially.
1. J. Wehe. Devils Lake, N. D., at.
torney for plaintiff and appellants
Eliada p. Wehe. Herbert C. Wehe ant
Laureas ]. Wehe.~
D. Y. Brennan, deceased, Bismarck
N. D.. attorney for the defendants ant
appellants Charles l.. Wehe, Jr., Delis
L. Wehe, Blanche H. Ray. Maude L
Stansberry and Alice G. Wehe.
Erich & Kelly, Lakota, N. D.. at
torneys for defendants and respond
ents.