Hummel v. Kistner

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania July 15, 1897

Hummel v. Kistner, 182 Pa. 216 (Pa. 1897)

37 A. 815; 1897 Pa. LEXIS 795

Dean, Fell, Green, Mitchell, Williams

Opinion of the Court

Per Curiam,

It is impossible to read the testimony in this case without *225attaining the conviction that the several deeds and conveyances made by John Hummel to his children, including Mrs. Kistner, were made and intended by him as a distribution of his estate in his lifetime. The values of the several properties conveyed were nearly equal, and the facts and circumstances attending the preparation and execution of the several deeds are absolutely convincing that such was his purpose. The learned court below has so found as a fact, and we entirely approve of the finding. The declarations of the deceased to the scrivener who wrote the deed for one of the properties to Mrs. Kistner were not privileged, being made in the presence of both parties to the transaction. As a matter of course there was nothing in the testimony to justify a finding of fraud in the execution of the deeds, and the court has so found. Neither is there anything sufficing to bring the conveyances to Mrs. Kistner within the rule which prohibits large gifts to persons occupying confidential relations with the donors without explanatory evidence. As a daughter of the donor, Mrs. Kistner might mate personal solicitations for conveyances to her, especially as her brothers and sisters had already received similar deeds, without being required to furnish explanatory testimony. We are entirely satisfied with the disposition of the case made by the learned court below.

Decree affirmed and appeal dismissed at the cost of the appellants.

Reference

Full Case Name: Ed. M. Hummel, Harry W. Hummel and John L. Cooper v. Annie C. Kistner and H. U. Kistner, her husband
Cited By: 10 cases
Status: Published
Syllabus: Parent and child — Deed—Evidence. Where a father by gifts and conveyances has distributed a portion of Ms estate to three of his four children, the fourth child, a daughter, who keeps house for her father, may make personal solicitations for conveyances to her, to equalize her share with the others, without being required to furnish explanatory testimony, such as is required of persons occupying confidential relations, who receive large gifts from others. Where, on a bill in equity, the court below finds upon sufficient evidence that certain conveyances made by a father to his daughter were made in pursuance of a general scheme on the part of the grantor to divide his property in Ms lifetime equally among his children, the Supreme Court will not upon appeal reverse the finding of the court below. Evidence — Declarations—Deed. On a bill in equity to set aside a deed made by a father in his lifetime to his daughter, declarations of the deceased to his attorney while he was writing the deed are not privileged, when made in the pi’esence of both parties to the transaction.