Campbell v. Northrop

PRESTON, J.

This action was instituted on September 6, 1927, to annul a lease made by plaintiff George Hack to defendant Lillian B. Northrop on the first day of April, 1926, and to recover possession of the premises covered thereby. The plaintiff died on April 14, 1928, a short time before the trial of the action, and his executors were sub

[46]

stituted as parties plaintiff in his stead. The word “plaintiff” as used in this opinion will refer to the original plaintiff, the decedent George Dack.

The cause of action counted upon fraud and undue influence, asserted to be of a sufficient degree and strength to warrant a rescission of the instrument. Issue was joined upon the allegations of the amended complaint and trial was had, followed by elaborate and sweeping findings of fact, followed by a judgment sustaining m

toto

the averments made, from which judgment defendants have prosecuted this appeal. No serious contention is made touching the sufficiency of the evidence to warrant a rescission upon the ground of fraud and undue influence. This fact is practically shown by the terms of the instrument itself, when read in the light of the surrounding circumstances, together with' the physical and mental condition of the plaintiff. However, it is necessary, for a proper consideration of the points urged, to set forth briefly certain of the facts and circumstances.

Plaintiff at the time in question was eighty-five years of age, with a life expectancy of 2.77 years, in failing health and in an extremely weak mental condition, being childish and obsessed with an abnormal sense of his own fascinations and power over the opposite sex. He owned eighty acres of land, known as the George Dack Mountain Ranch Garage and Camp Grounds, together with a valuable water right appurtenant thereto. Previous to the time in question he had leased to one Miller the garage on said property. Miller in turn attempted to transfer this lease to the defendants, who in the year 1925 took possession of said garage. From this period until after the instrument in question was. executed plaintiff boarded with the defendant Lillian Northrop. The evidence is plain that during- all this time said defendant set on foot a systematic line of conduct to overreach and control the will power and action of said plaintiff. Her influence and power over him she frequently admitted. There is considerable evidence that in order to secure the lease in question she even went so far as to display her physical charms over the old man. The terms .of the lease show a demise period of twenty years, with a monthly rental of six dollars, payable, however, only “during the life” of plaintiff. The court found the