Case Name: GRABER v. BOSWELL
Court: Oregon Supreme Court
Jurisdiction: Oregon
Decision Date: 1919-07-01
Citations: 94 Or. 70
Docket Number: 
Parties: GRABER v. BOSWELL
Judges: McBride, C. J., and Burnett and Harris, JJ., concur.
Reporter: Oregon Reports
Volume: 94
Pages: 70–79

Head Matter:
Argued June 24,
modified July 1,
further modified on rehearing November 4, 1919.
GRABER v. BOSWELL
(181 Pac. 986; 185 Pac. 231.)
Mortgages — Future Advances — Sufficiency of Evidence.
1. In suit to foreclose a mortgage for future advances, evidence held insufficient to establish plaintiff’s right to more than $83.40 on an amount of $250 claimed by plaintiff to have been paid by the original mortgagee, her deceased husband, as attorney for defendant mortgagor, for a metallic casket for the remains of defendant’s husband.
Mortgages — Future Advances.
2. In suit by widow of attorney, who had aeted for defendant widow frf his friend, to foreclose a mortgage given by defendant to such attorney to secure advances, the attorney having filed a voucher against the estate for an amount of $50 claimed to have been paid for exhuming and transporting the remains of defendant’s husband for interment elsewhere, the 'additional charge of $111 shown in his personal account against the widow, who insisted that even the $50 charge is excessive, should be eliminated.
ON REHEARING-.
Appeal and Error — Modification of Opinion.
3. In an' action to foreclose a mortgage, where it appears that the note which the mortgage secured was given to cover future advances, the Supreme Court on appeal will consider the action as one for an accounting and dispose of the matter, where it is clear that no evidence other than that before the court could possibly be produced in another formal suit for an accounting.
Mortgages — Burden of Proof — Advances by Mortgagee.
4. In an action to foreclose a mortgage securing a note given to cover future advances, the burden of proof rests upon the plaintiff to' establish the amount of money advanced to the defendant.
Mortgages — Evidence on Foreclosure — Items to be Considered.
5. In an action to foreclose a mortgage securing a note given to cover future advanees, the faet that mortgagor shipped mineral water to the mortgagee must be disregarded, where there is no evidence as to the quantity of water shipped or its market value.
Prom Douglas: George P. Skipworth, Judge..
Department 1.
This is a suit to foreclose a mortgage upon real estate. The complaint is in the usual form. The note and mortgage were both executed in favor of Thomas F. Graber, who subsequently died, leaving a will naming his widow, the plaintiff herein, as his sole legatee.
The answer admits the execution of the instruments upon which the suit is based, but denies that they were executed for a valuable consideration, and then pleads affirmatively that defendant is the widow 'of Benjamin D. Boswell, who died May 19,1907, and who for a long time prior to his death, was a client and close personal friend of Thomas F. Graber, who was a practicing attorney at law in Oakland, California; that Boswell, in his last will and testament had appointed Graber to be the executor thereof, but owing to the fact that Graber was a resident of California, he could not qualify as such executor, and the defendant was therefore appointed administratrix with the will annexed, of her husband’s estate. She then retained Graber as her legal adviser in the administration of the estate, relying implicitly upon him faithfully and honestly to direct her therein, placing special, confidence in him by reason of his intimate friendship for her deceased husband. She avers that Graber represented to her that it would be necessary for her to have some ready money wherewith to pay the debts of the estate, including a mortgage of $700 due to the State Land Board of Oregon, and suggested $1,000 as the sum necessary to be raised, but later, induced her to execute the note and mortgage above mentioned, in the sum of $2,000. She further asserts that he promised to protect her interests and that she would only be required to pay thereon such sums as should be thereafter actually advanced by him for such purposes; that thereafter, and prior to the final settlement of the estate, the defendant, with the advice of Graber, sold a portion of the real estate for $2,000, and this sum was used to pay the $700 mortgage to the State' Land Board, and all of the debts of the estate, including the expenses of. administration, leaving a surplus after all debts were paid, 'and that all claims of said Graber against the estate or herself have been fully paid. It is further alleged that she has repeatedly sought to obtain a settlement and adjustment with Graber, but the same had always been pQstponed by him, and she has never succeeded in securing the same.
The reply admits the personal friendship and professional relations existing between Graber and Boswell, the allegations in regard to the appointment of défendant as administratrix of her husband’s estate, the sale of certain real estate for $2,000, and the employment of Graber as defendant’s legal adviser, but denies generally all other allegations of the affirmative answer.
A trial was had, resulting in a decree in accordance with the prayer of the complaint, and defendant appeals.
Modified.
For appellant there was a brief and an oral argument by Mr. Oliver P. Coshow.
For respondent there was a brief over the names of Messrs. Nexmer & Wixnberly and Mr. G. L. Colvin, witan oral argument by Mr. Carl E. Wimberly.

Opinion:
BENSON, J.
The history of this case presents an unfortunate situation. Thomas F. Graber, the payee named in the note and mortgage, was a lawyer, having his offices in Oakland, California. After the final settlement and distribution of the Boswell estate, and after all of the transactions involved in the present litigation, he died, and the plaintiff, being his widow, succeeded to his interests. She evidently knew very little of her husband's business affairs prior to his death, and there is no one else who can supply the information. If the defendant ever kept any connected record of her financial transactions, it is not before us. Thomas F. Graber apparently left no detailed record of his financial dealings with Mrs. Boswell, other than an account book which was found among his effects in his office, after his decease. Our investigation of the facts then, is confined to the records of the County Court, in the matter of the estate of B. D. Boswell, deceased, the book accounts and canceled checks of Thomas F. Graber, deceased, and the parol testimony of Mrs. Boswell. After a careful investigation of the entire record, we are impressed with the fact that there is no evidence of any conscious bad faith upon the part of any of the parties hereto, or of any desire to deal otherwise than in perfect honesty and fairness.
Prior to his death, which occurred on May 19, 1907, B. D. Boswell owned certain lands in Douglas County, Oregon, known as Boswell Springs, whereon he conducted a hotel which was to some extent popular by reason of the reputed medicinal value of the mineral springs situated upon the premises. For several years prior to May 19,1907, Thomas F. Graber, a practicing attorney, of Oakland, California, had been a close personal friend and the legal adviser of Captain Boswell, and the latter, in his last will and testament had nominated Graber to be the executor thereof, without exacting any bond for the faithful performance of. the duties involved therein. Owing to the fact of his being a resident of another state Graber could not qualify as such executor, and the widow and sole legatee, Emma E. Boswell, received letters testamentary as administratrix, with the will annexed, and Graber was retained by her as' her legal adviser. It was soon discovered that while the claims against the estate were considerable, the only ready money amounted to no more than $108. After her husband's death, Mrs. Boswell continued to conduct the hotel with some success until the summer of 1908, when the buildings were destroyed by fire. Thereafter, Graber suggested to Mrs. Boswell, who in the meanwhile was living in Oakland, California, that she would need money to meet the claims against the estate, as well as for her personal requirements, that she should execute to him a note and mortgage for $2,000, upon the real estate, out of which claims would be paid, and money provided for her maintenance. This was done on October 22, 1908. Subsequently, a portion of the land was released from the lien of the mortgage, and sold for the sum of $2,000. On September 1, 1909, Graber mailed to Mrs. Boswell an itemized statement of the fund thus acquired, from which it appears that after paying the principal and accrued interest on a nóte to the State Land Board, together with taxes thereon, and certain obligations of Mrs. Boswell's, there was a balance of $578.30, which he paid her by check. This statement disposes satisfactorily of any contention that this fund was applied to the payment of any other claims of Graber against Mrs. Boswell, and brings us to the definite conclusion that any other advances made to her or in her behalf were directly chargeable to the fund provided by the note and mortgage which are the subject of this suit. These items were kept by Graber, in a separate and distinct account in his day- book, and consist, first, of an item of $976.64, for claims against the Boswell estate, which had been paid by him. The correctness of this item is disputed by Mrs. Boswell, who testifies that of the $250 which had been paid for a metallic casket for the remains of the deceased, Mr. Graber paid only $83.40. An examination of the vouchers filed with the final account discloses that the claim of the undertaker shows three credits of $50 each, "by check," and credits for poultry and eggs, and a cash payment of $10, all at dates while Mrs. Boswell was conducting the hotel and sanitarium. The only voucher filed by Graber, in this connection, is for the balance of $83.40, and we are driven to the conclusion that plaintiff has not established her right to a credit of more than $83.40 thereon, by a preponderance of the evidence.
Another item is that for exhuming and transporting the remains of Captain Boswell to San Francisco for interment at the Presidio. This item is set out in the final account as being $50' and Mr. Graber filed a voucher therefor in that amount. But we also find him making an additional charge of $111 therefor, in his personal account against Mrs. Boswell, who insists that even the fifty-dollar charge is excessive. We think the item of $111 should be eliminated.
The remaining items going to make up the consideration of the note sued upon, consist of a number of sums of money advanced to defendant at various times, certain bills of hers paid by him, and the sum of $500, which constitutes his charge for legal services, and $75 as traveling expenses necessarily incurred in the same connection. We are satisfied that these items are cor-I rect and reasonable, and should be allowed.
Making the deductions indicated above, the amount of the decree will be reduced from $3,364.44 to $2,934.83, with which modification the decree of the trial court is affirmed without costs to either party in this court. Modified.
McBride, C. J., and Burnett and Harris, JJ., concur.