Griffin v. McIntosh.
Decision Date | 09 June 1903 |
Citation | 75 S.W. 677,176 Mo. 392 |
Court | Missouri Supreme Court |
Parties | GRIFFIN et al. v. McINTOSH.<SMALL><SUP>*</SUP></SMALL> |
2. Defendant's father executed a deed to defendant, which was not to take effect until the death of defendant's father and mother, when it was to be delivered to defendant or his heirs. Shortly before the father's death he stated to a witness, in defendant's presence, that he would give the deed up to defendant, that defendant "could take care of it," and that he would give it into defendant's "care to take care of it." The witness then procured the deed and delivered the same to defendant. Held, that such declarations were insufficient to show an intent of the father to waive the provisions of the deed and vest a present interest in the grantee.
3. A deed which was in effect a testamentary disposition of the property could not operate as a will after the grantor's death, where not properly attested as such.
Appeal from Circuit Court, Polk County; Argus Cox, Judge.
Action by Susan B. Griffin and others against James H. McIntosh. From a judgment in favor of defendant, plaintiffs appeal. Reversed.
Ross & Sea, for appellants. J. B. Upton and C. H. Skinker, for respondent.
This is an action by two of the daughters of Collon McIntosh, deceased, to recover each one undivided one-eighth of certain real estate in Polk county from the defendant, James H. McIntosh, their brother, who is a son of said Collon McIntosh, deceased. Collon McIntosh left surviving him at his death, March 23, 1896, his widow, Jane McIntosh, who afterwards died January 7, 1898, and eight children. After the death of the widow the plaintiffs brought this action of ejectment to be let into possession with their brother, the defendant, of two-eighths of the lands owned by their father in his lifetime, and of which defendant was and had been in the exclusive possession since the death of his mother, January 7, 1898. The defendant claimed title through a deed from his father and mother of date February 15, 1895, which is in words and figures following:
In witness Whereof, The said parties of the First Part have hereunto set their hands and seals the day and year first above written.
Plaintiff objected to this deed on the ground that it was void on its face. The defendant offered parol evidence that this deed was delivered to him about two weeks before his father's death. To this evidence plaintiff objected on the ground that it would contradict the intention of the grantor as shown on the face of the instrument, and that defendant was bound by the recitals therein. These objections were by the court overruled, and plaintiff duly excepted.
The construction to be given this instrument is the controlling point on this appeal. The instrument is an ordinary warranty deed in form, except the clause immediately following the description, which is as follows: "Upon this express condition that the said Collon McIntosh and Jane McIntosh is to live on the farm till their death as one of the family and to hold the deed in their possession till their death, then this deed is to be delivered to James H. McIntosh or his heirs." What effect must be given this instrument? It is beyond conjecture that Collon McIntosh and his wife executed this instrument with the intention of conferring at some time the title to the lands therein described on his son James, and, looking to this condition, it would appear to be equally clear that the time when the title was to vest in the son was after the death of the...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Davis v. Rossi
...become operative alone upon the death of the grantor, it is testamentary in character and void. Murphy v. Gabbert, 166 Mo. 596; Griffin v. McIntosh, 176 Mo. 392; Aldridge v. Aldridge, 202 Mo. 565; Givens v. Ott, 222 Mo. 395; Terry v. Glover, 235 Mo. 544; Coles v. Belford, 289 Mo. 97. (8) Th......
-
Trautz v. Lemp
...can be no delivery to the parties named after his death. Van Huff v. Wagner, 287 S.W. 1039; Peters v. Berkemeier, 184 Mo. 393; Griffin v. McIntosh, 176 Mo. 392. If an estate vests in interest during the life or lives in being and twenty-one years thereafter, the possession and enjoyment may......
-
Blackiston v. Russell
... ... Wagner, 287 S.W. 1038; Coles v ... Bedford, 232 S.W. 728; Ray v. Walker, 240 S.W ... 196; Murphy v. Gabbert, 166 Mo. 596; Griffin v ... McIntosh, 176 Mo. 392; Dallas v. McNutt, 249 ... S.W. 36. (2) The evidence on the part of defendants wholly ... failed to meet the ... ...
-
Davis v. Rossi
...Eq.) 7; Sterling v. Wilkinson, 83 Va. 797; Stevenson v. Earle, 65 N.J.Eq. 721, 103 Am. St. 790; Murphy v. Gabbert, 166 Mo. 596; Griffin v. McIntosh, 176 Mo. 392; Aldridge v. Aldridge, 202 Mo. 565; Givens Ott, 222 Mo. 395; Coles v. Belford, 289 Mo. 97. (21) In the case of a trust by declarat......