Yoakum v. Grimes

California Court of Appeal Jun 10, 1925 No. Docket No. 4372.Published

Before: Conrey

AI Brief

AI-generated · verify before citing

Holding. The court held that the stock transfers were made in trust for the benefit of the decedent's heirs and affirmed the judgment requiring the defendants to transfer the shares to the estate's administratrix for the benefit of those heirs.

Issues

Whether the evidence supports the finding that the stock was transferred in trust for the benefit of the decedent's heirs.
Whether the plaintiff's action seeks to enforce rather than revoke a trust.
Whether the administratrix is the proper party to maintain the action to recover the trust property.

Disposition. affirmed

Quotations verified verbatim against the opinion

“The evidence being thus plainly sufficient to sustain the finding that John E. Yoakum intended to assign all of the stock in trust for the benefit of his heirs, that finding must be sustained”

“we agree with respondent that the purpose of the action is to enforce, and not to revoke a trust.”

[205]

CONREY, P. J.

The judgment in this case determines that certain shares of stock of the John E. Yoakum Company, a corporation, are. property of the estate of John E. Yoakum, and that plaintiff is entitled to possession thereof; and orders that the several defendants transfer to plaintiff the shares of stock held by them, as evidenced by their certificates of stock.

The findings of fact, which closely follow the allegations of the complaint, are to the effect that on the fourth day of June, 1915, John E. Yoakum was the owner of 14,960 shares of the capital stock of the John E. Yoakum Company, a corporation; that on that date he executed a written instrument in the following terms:

“Por and in consideration of Ten Dollars and other valuable considerations from Mary A. Grimes, I hereby assign to Clyde Grimes one of her heirs, as trustee for the heirs of the John E. Yoakum Company, 11000 shares of stock in the above said Company, No. 82.

“John E. Yoakum, Pres.

.“Clyde Grimes.

“Also this day I have assigned the following stock in above said Company to John V. Yoakum, 1000 shares—No. 86, Queenie (Yoakum) Graves 1000 shares—No. 85, Jennie Y. Dickenson, 1000 shares—No. 84, Valentine S. Yoakum, 1000 shares—No. 83.”

Here it should be explained that the evidence shows that at the same time'an apparently intended duplicate of this instrument was separately written, on which the signatures in addition to those above shown included the individual signature of John E. Yoakum at the bottom of the instrument. Clyde Grimes also signed both papers. The second instrument to which we refer was not an exact duplicate, for the reason that in the first paragraph the number of shares was given as 10,000 instead of 11,000. There is no dispute about this discrepancy. The judgment assumes that the true number of shares assigned to Grimes was 10,000, and the plaintiff in fact claims nothing more so far as that item is concerned.

The findings are further to the effect that on said fourth day of June, 1915, the said John E. Yoakum caused the corporation to cancel his certificate for 14,960 shares,

Yoakum v. Grimes

AI Brief

CONREY, P. J.

More from California Court of Appeal

Related research

AI Brief