Opinion
December Term, 1896.
Judgments affirmed, with costs, upon the opinion at Special Term. All concurred.
The following is the opinion delivered at Special Term:
The questions involved in these cases seem substantially of fact. If plaintiffs knew and comprehended their acts in executing the papers they should be bound. A long and minute discussion of minor matters is not necessary, for, after a careful review of the testimony and briefs, I am convinced beyond question that plaintiffs exactly and fully understood the papers. It must be borne in mind that there was no confidential relation between plaintiffs and defendant, or the attorney for the defendant. If the attorney for the defendant had acted for the plaintiffs or advised them, a very different question would have been presented. I am satisfied that defendant, during all the time she lived with Henry C. Ditmas and until his death, believed herself to be his lawful wife and so did all the relatives. After his death it was first discovered that the marriage was void by reason of the judgment of divorce, and his heirs were brought together on two different occasions to execute deeds and releases by which they transferred all their interests to the defendant. After full explanation the papers were executed. It first it seems surprising that plaintiffs, who were in humble circumstances, should give up a large estate for a nominal consideration. The fact that they were poor in nowise prevented them from doing what they thought to be right. They considered they took as heirs by reason of a technicality of the law, and further they knew that Mr. Ditmas died suddenly and had no warning in time to make a will. The plaintiffs were no doubt influenced by the mother of Mr. Ditmas and by his sister to execute the papers. The mother and sister thought that the estate left by Mr. Ditmas equitably belonged to the defendant and her children and so advised plaintiffs and the other heirs. The plaintiffs could read the papers and understand what was read to them and the law casts on them the burden of showing fraud or mistake. They have failed to make out a case calling for equitable relief.