Fairfield v. Barbour

• Decision Date: 20 June 1883
• Citation: 51 Mich. 57,16 N.W. 230
• Court: Michigan Supreme Court
• Parties: FAIRFIELD and others v. BARBOUR and others.

16 N.W. 230

51 Mich. 57

FAIRFIELD and others v. BARBOUR and others.

Supreme Court of Michigan

June 20, 1883

As the evidence in this case shows that there was an oral agreement to convey the land in controversy to complainant in consideration of her husband building a house thereon for her, and that the husband has built the house, set out shade-trees, and otherwise improved the property, and gone inte actual possession, the conveyance of the land to a sister of complainant, with knowledge of these facts, should be set aside, and specific performance of the oral agreement to convey decreed.

Appeal from Mecosta.

M. Brown, for complainants.

Frank Dumon and J.H. Palmer, for defendants and appellants.

SHERWOOD J.

The bill in this case is filed to compel a conveyance by defendants to the complainant Josephine Fairfield of lots Nos. two (2) and three, (3,) in block No. twenty-three, (23,) in Warren & Bronson's third subdivision to the city of Big Rapids, in specific performance of an alleged parol agreement. The agreement, as stated in the bill on which complainants ask relief, was made in the forepart of the month of September, 1876. The complainant Josephine Fairfield is the wife of George W. Fairfield, her co-complainant, and daughter of Theron W. Barbour, one of the defendants. The parties all lived in the city of Big Rapids, where they still reside. The bill states that on the first day of September 1876, the defendant Theron W. Barbour owned in fee-simple the lots in question; and that, between the first and twenty-third days of said month, it was verbally agreed between the complainant George W. Fairfield, and defendant Theron W. Barbour, that said Barbour would assist said Fairfield to build a dwelling-house upon the said premises of said Barbour, above described, for a home for complainants and their family; and that said Fairfield should manage so that the building of said dwelling-house should cost said Barbour as little money as possible; and that, when said dwelling-house should be ready to be occupied, the said Barbour would convey, in fee-simple, said premises to said Josephine Fairfield, (his daughter, and wife of said George,) for a home for complainants and their family.

There is no dispute between the parties that a parol agreement for the building of a house on the lots in question, to be occupied by complainant's wife, was entered into by said Theron W. Barbour, whereby his daughter Josephine might have a home, so long as complainants should live in said house, without rent, except as the labor of her husband, George W. Fairfield, upon said premises should be considered rent. The bill avers that Theron W. Barbour, the defendant, pursuant to said agreement, did assist complainant, in accordance with the terms thereof, to build said dwelling-house upon said premises; that said complainant, relying upon the performance of said agreement by said defendant pursuant to the terms thereof, built said dwelling-house upon said premises, superintended the entire building thereof, and did a large portion of the work himself; that he cleared the ground from rubbish, logs, and stumps which incumbered it; graded its uneven surface; set out shade and ornamental trees, fruit-trees, grape-vines, and built fences and a stone walk in front of the premises; that late in the fall of 1876 complainants moved into the dwelling-house, then in an unfinished condition, and finished and have occupied the same up to the present time.

The proofs in the case were taken in open court, and they substantially support all these averments. The only material controversy between the parties is whether complainants did the work upon the dwelling-house, made the improvements upon the lots, and hold possession of the premises under an agreement to occupy as owners or as tenants.

The contract, as stated by the complainants, is in terms sufficiently clear and specific to leave no doubt respecting the intention of the parties. The testimony of complainants and of their witnesses harmonizes with the contract as claimed,--that it was an agreement to convey the title to Josephine Fairfield as a home. Whether this construction shall prevail...