Cluney v. Law
| Docket Number: | 2000-CT-02025-SCT Linked Case(s): 2000-CT-02025-SCT |
|
| Supreme Court: | Opinion Link Opinion Date: 04-08-2004 Opinion Author: Graves, J. Holding: The Judgment of the Court of Appeals is Reversed, and the Judgment of the Chancery Court of Monroe County is Affirmed. |
|
| Additional Case Information: |
Topic: Wills & estates - Fraud - Reliance Judge(s) Concurring: Smith, C.J., Waller, P.J., and Carlson, J. Non Participating Judge(s): Diaz, J. Dissenting Author : Easley, J. Dissenting Author : Cobb, P.J. Dissent Joined By : Dickinson, J., and in Part by Easley, J. Procedural History: Bench Trial Nature of the Case: CIVIL - WILLS, TRUSTS, AND ESTATES Writ of Certiorari: Granted Appealed from Court of Appeals |
|
| Trial Court: |
Date of Trial Judgment: 11-09-2000 Appealed from: Monroe County Chancery Court Judge: Jacqueline Mask Disposition: CONVEYANCE OF LAND SET ASIDE ON THE BASIS OF FRAUD Case Number: 99-0460 |
|
| Note: | The Supreme Court found that the trial court made sufficient findings of fact to support its decision, and the Court of Appeals erred in concluding otherwise. | |
| Party Name: | Attorney Name: | |||
| Appellant: | In Re: Estate of William George Law, Deceased: Dolores Cluney a/k/a Dolores Law |
|||
| Appellee: | John David Law, Administrator |
|
||
Synopsis provided by:  If you are interested in subscribing to the weekly synopses of all Mississippi Supreme Court and Court of Appeals hand downs please contact Tammy Upton in the MLI Press office. |
|
| Topic: | Wills & estates - Fraud - Reliance |
| Summary of the Facts: | George Law and Dolores Cluney participated in a marriage ceremony. Law deeded Cluney a survivorship interest in his house and the surrounding one-acre lot. When Law died intestate, additional acreage he owned was inherited by his children. Law's son, John Law, was appointed administrator of the estate, and he petitioned the court to have the deed set aside and the marriage declared void. It eventually came to light that Cluney had been legally married to Raymond Cluney since 1972 and that she had represented herself in court documents to be the common-law wife of a second man, Timothy Johnson, whom she tried to have committed in 1992. Since Cluney's marriage to George Law was void, the chancellor granted partial summary judgment and set aside all of her inheritance rights. The chancellor later set aside the deed conveying the house and established a constructive trust for the benefit of the heirs. Cluney appealed, and the Court of Appeals reversed and rendered. The Supreme Court granted certiorari. |
| Summary of Opinion Analysis: | Law argues that the Court of Appeals erred in finding the element of George Law's reliance on the marriage in conveying the deed was not proven. Factors for setting aside a conveyance based on fraud include a representation; its falsity; its materiality; the speaker's knowledge of its falsity or ignorance of its truth; his intent that it should be acted upon by the person and in the manner reasonably contemplated; the hearer's ignorance of its falsity; his reliance on its truth; his right to rely thereon; and his consequent and proximate injury. The Court of Appeals used implications and inferences most favorable to Cluney in order to find that the element of reliance was not proven. That finding is erroneous. The suppositions that the marriage was not important to the grantor's decision and that the conveyance was consideration for household services defy other established standards of law, not to mention common sense and logic. Law was in bad health from the beginning of the relationship. He did not convey the house to Cluney until after the marriage and then he conveyed it to his "wife," as he believed her to be. Cluney admits and the record reflects that George Law had no knowledge of Cluney's prior marriage. Common sense dictates that a man involved in a serious intimate relationship with a woman that results in marriage is not going to leave a house to her and her heirs when she defrauded him and knew the marriage was invalid. |
Home | Terms of Use | About the JDP | Feedback | Using JDP | MC Law Library | Mississippi Supreme Court
