Bould v. Coe
| Decision Date | 30 January 1953 |
| Citation | 63 So.2d 273 |
| Parties | BOULD et al. v. COE. |
| Court | Florida Supreme Court |
Clyde M. Kissinger, Madeira Beach, for appellants.
Baskin, Smith & Baskin, H. H. Baskin, Sr., George W. Smith and H. H. Baskin, Jr., Clearwater, for appellee.
The Chancellor entered a final decree cancelling a deed from the appellee-plaintiff to the appellant-defendant, Dorothy L. Bould, whereupon the defendants brought this appeal. In support of the appeal appellants present three assignments of error magnified into nine questions. However, we find that only the one that 'Chancellor erred in making and entering the final decree in this cause on June 6th, 1952,' merits consideration and this we find not to be sustained.
The only determinative question presented is whether the deed involved was delivered by or on behalf of the grantors, who were Mrs. Coe and her deceased husband, to the grantee, Mrs. Bould. The decree of the Chancellor is inconsistent with a finding that a delivery occurred and there is ample evidence to support a finding that there was no delivery. A deed takes effect upon delivery and nothing passes until delivery. Houston v. Adams, 85 Fla. 291, 95 So. 859. It is evident that Mrs. Coe intended to retain the deed until her death and that the taking of the possession of the deed by the grantee, although explained, was not justified and that the decree appealed should be affirmed. It is so ordered.
Affirmed.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
In re Shannis, 98-08780-3P7
...or on the date the deed was recorded. The Defendants rely on Jeffords v. Jeffords, 148 So.2d 43 (Fla.Dist.Ct.App.1962) and Bould v. Coe, 63 So.2d 273 (Fla.1953) to support the proposition that all real property transfers in Florida occur on the date the deed is delivered. (Defs.' Br. at 6-7......
-
McCoy v. Love
...essential requisite of the execution of a deed conveying valid legal title. Without delivery, nothing passes to the grantee. Bould v. Coe, 63 So.2d 273 (Fla.1953); Lance v. Smith, 123 Fla. 461, 167 So. 366 (1936); Parken v. Jafford, 48 Fla. 290, 37 So. 567 (1904); Ellis v. Clark, 39 Fla. 71......
-
Sargent v. Baxter
...that intention was not fulfilled. Sargent's subsequent possession of the deed does not alone evidence delivery to her. See Bould v. Coe, 63 So.2d 273 (Fla.1953) (affirming decree cancelling deed which grantor intended to retain until death; although grantee's possession was explained, it wa......
-
Grossman v. Pollack, 57-212
...certain contingencies. When the deed is not delivered out of escrow nothing passes. Houston v. Adams, 85 Fla. 291, 95 So. 859; Bould v. Coe, Fla.1953, 63 So.2d 273. The Chancellor correctly concluded that when it was established that plaintiff's employer never had a lease, plaintiff could n......
-
Five tips every real estate practitioner should know about defective deeds.
...(holding that delivery of a deed by the grantor and acceptance by the grantee are essential to transfer title). See also Bould v. Coe, 63 So. 2d 273 (Fla. 1953) (holding that a deed takes effect upon delivery); Jeffords v. Jeffords, 148 So. 2d 43 (Fla. 1st D.C.A. 1962) (noting that "[i]t ha......