Danforth v. Danforth

663 S.W.2d 288 (1983)

From our private database of 46,300+ case briefs, written and edited by humans—never with AI.

Danforth v. Danforth

Missouri Court of Appeals
663 S.W.2d 288 (1983)

Facts

Loretta Ollison Danforth (defendant), 21 years old, married Duncan R. Danforth, 75 years old, on August 13, 1980. A few hours earlier, Duncan executed a will giving Loretta over half of his estate and revoking a 1978 will that had split Duncan’s estate between two of his children, Frank Danforth and Janette Barb (plaintiffs). Before and after her wedding, Loretta lived with her boyfriend, Mike Stith, at her mother’s house. On August 12, 1980, Stith and Loretta met with Harrison Williams, who was the boyfriend of Stith’s aunt, and Williams’s friend Jack Peary to plan Duncan’s murder. The plan was for Williams and Peary to kill Duncan at the hotel where Loretta and Duncan were spending their wedding night. On the evening of August 13, Duncan and Loretta went to the hotel after their wedding, but Williams and Peary kept giving Loretta different excuses why they could not kill Duncan. Loretta kept developing new plans, and Williams and Peary kept coming up with new excuses. The next day, Duncan returned to his home without Loretta. Duncan complained that his honeymoon was unsatisfactory because Loretta would not touch him and kept making excuses to leave the room. Duncan told Frank that he would annul the marriage if Loretta would not come live with him. On August 17, Duncan left to go to house of Loretta’s mother to discuss his and Loretta’s marriage. Duncan was found shot to death on a rural road. On August 18, Stith told Williams the job had taken care of itself. Frank and Janette filed a petition challenging Duncan’s 1980 will, claiming it was procured by fraud. Frank and Janette alleged that Loretta falsely represented to Duncan that she loved him to induce Duncan into executing a will giving Loretta much of his estate. At trial, Frank and Janette presented evidence of Loretta’s actions to procure Duncan’s murder. The jury set aside the 1980 will. Loretta appealed, arguing, among other things, that Frank and Janette’s claim did not plead fraud with sufficient particularity and the trial court should not have admitted evidence of Loretta’s plans to murder Duncan.

Rule of Law

Issue

Holding and Reasoning (Lowenstein, J.)

What to do next…

  1. Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.

    You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 820,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.

  2. Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.

    Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students.

Here's why 820,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 989 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
  • The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
  • Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
  • Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership
Here's why 820,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
  • Reliable - written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students
  • The right length and amount of information - includes the facts, issue, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents
  • Access in your class - works on your mobile and tablet
  • 46,300 briefs - keyed to 989 casebooks
  • Uniform format for every case brief
  • Written in plain English - not in legalese and not just repeating the court's language
  • Massive library of related video lessons - and practice questions
  • Top-notch customer support

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership