Fuller v. Bradley

• Decision Date: 11 October 1895
• Parties: FULLER et al. v. BRADLEY.
• Court: Illinois Supreme Court

160 Ill. 51

43 N.E. 732

FULLER et al.

v.BRADLEY.¹

Supreme Court of Illinois.

Oct. 11. 1895.

Appeal from circuit court, Peoria county; T. M. Shaw, Judge.

Bill by Lydia Bradley against D. B. Fuller and others to compel the conveyance to her of certain real property. From a decree in favor of plaintiff, defendants appeal. Affirmed.

H. W. Wells, for appellants.

W. W. Hammond, for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

The original bill in chancery herein was filed on December 10, 1891, in the Peoria county circuit court, by Lydia Bradley, the appellee, for the purpose of compelling the conveyance to her of an undivided one-eighth interest of lot 29, range 2, Moss' addition in the city of Peoria. She claimed, in her bill, to be the equitable assignee of a bond for a deed to the whole of said lot. It was stated, in said bill, that on May 1, 1852, William S. Moss was the owner in fee of the lot, and that on that day he executed and delivered to William Hughes a bond for a deed, ‘whereby he agreed to convey said lot to said William Hughes, upon the payment of $1,500, due ten years after date, with interest at the rate of six per cent. per annum, payable annually in advance, and took the note of said William Hughes, of the same date, in the sum of $1,500, due ten years after date, with interest at the rate of six per cent. per annum, as evidence of said indebtedness.’ The defendants below, appellants here, answered the bill, admitting some and denying other of its allegations. They denied that appellee was the owner of or had any title or claim to the share of an undivided one-eighth part of said lot 29 that had belonged to Sarah Bradley, deceased, and claimed that they, appellants, were the owners of such share. They also filed a cross bill for partition of said lot, and for other relief. Issues were formed upon the original and cross bills. There was a reference to the master in chancery, and he reported back to the court the proofs taken in the cause and his conclusions thereon. There were exceptions to the report, interposed by appellants. Such proceedings were had at the hearing before the chancellor as that a decree was rendered requiring the adult defendants in the original bill to convey, within 60 days, to appellee, the premises in controversy, and that, in default of their so doing, the master should convey, and directing the master to convey for the defendants in said bill who were minors, and dismissing out of court the cross bill of appellants.

The facts of the case are substantially as follows: On May 1, 1852, one William Hughes executed and delivered to William S. Moss his promissory note of that date for $1,500, due 10 years after date, with interest at the rate of 6 per cent. per annum, payable annually in advance. In consideration thereof, said Moss, the owner in fee of lot 29 in question, executed and delivered to Hughes his bond for a deed, of the same date, whereby he agreed to convey said lot to said Hughes, upon the payment of the said note and interest. On May 18, 1860, Moss sold and indorsed the note, without recourse, to Pliny Curtiss, and on the same day made and delivered a deed of the lot to Nathaniel B. Curtiss. The deed contained the following reservation: ‘Subject, nevertheless, and notwithstanding the covenants hereinafter made, to the terms and conditions of a certain bond for a deed made by William S. Moss to William Hughes, dated May 1st, A. D. 1852, as by reference to said bond will fully appear.’ On May [160 Ill. 53]31, 1860, Nathaniel B. Curtiss and wife made a quitclaim deed of the premises to said Pliny Curtiss. On September 4, 1861, Pliny Curtiss and wife conveyed the lot, by warranty deed, to Tobias S. Bradley, and on the same day he indorsed the note, without recourse, and delivered it to him. On May 4, 1867, Tobias S. Bradley died intestate, leaving, surviving him, his widow, the appellee herein, and one brother, Cincinnatus Bradley, and three sisters, Drucilla B. Fuller, Mary K. Gray, and Sarah Bradley, as his only heirs at law. The last-named sister, Sarah Bradley, was an insane woman. On November 14, 1868, Cincinnatus Bradley and his wife conveyed to appellee the undivided one-eighth part of all the lands of which Tobias S. Bradley died seised. On November 25, 1868, Drucilla B. Fuller and her husband executed to appellee a quitclaim deed of all the title and estate which they or either of them inherited in lands of which Tobias S. Bradley died seised, but the deed expressly excepted any interest or estate in the property which the grantors might inherit or purchase from any person other than Tobias S. Bradley; and on August 2, 1868, Mary K. Gray made to appellee a similar quitclaim deed, containing like exceptions. On May 13, 1867, letters of administration upon the estate of Tobias Bradley, deceased, were issued to appellee; and she qualified as administratrix. On May 14, 1867, she filed in the county court inventories of the real and personal property of her intestate. In Schedule C, annexed to the inventory, the William Hughes note is listed: ‘Principal, $1,500; interest, $540.’ On October 10, 1872, appellee, ‘as administratrix of...