Hale v. Joslin
| Decision Date | 27 February 1883 |
| Citation | 134 Mass. 310 |
| Court | United States State Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts Supreme Court |
| Parties | Calvin Hale v. James T. Joslin & others |
Argued November 23, 1882
Middlesex. Bill in equity, filed November 29, 1880, alleging that, on August 7, 1873, Elijah Hale conveyed to the plaintiff by warranty deed a certain parcel of land in Stow and on that day delivered the deed in trust to Edwin Whitney one of the defendants, for the benefit and use of the plaintiff, as an escrow, and upon the express condition, and under the direction given by the grantor to Whitney, that, upon the grantor's decease, Whitney should forthwith deliver the deed to the plaintiff; that Whitney then received the deed in trust, as such an escrow, and upon said condition, and agreed with the grantor to comply with the direction so made and given by him; that Elijah Hale died on April 21, 1879, leaving a will, which, after the giving of certain specific legacies, devised the residue of his estate to his heirs at law, and appointed Joslin executor, with power to sell the real estate; that Joslin accepted the trust, and was duly appointed executor by the Probate Court; that, upon the death of Elijah Hale, Whitney refused to comply with said direction in regard to the delivery of the deed to the plaintiff, although often requested so to do; that Whitney had delivered over the deed to Joslin, without the consent and against the wishes of the plaintiff, and refused to obtain the same from Joslin for the plaintiff; and that Joslin, although often requested by the plaintiff, refused to deliver the deed to him, and claimed to hold it under and by virtue of his appointment as executor, and because, as he asserted, he had been notified by the heirs at law that they claimed the premises mentioned in the deed as belonging to the estate of Elijah Hale. The prayer of the bill was that Joslin might be restrained from selling the premises conveyed by said deed; and for further relief.
The answer of Whitney alleged the following facts: Whitney, at the request of Elijah Hale, wrote out and prepared the deed mentioned in the bill, on or about the day of its date, and as a magistrate, took the grantor's acknowledgment thereof. The grantor then placed the deed in Whitney's hand, and said: The deed was in Whitney's custody until Elijah Hale's death, and was seen by no other person. On April 24, 1874, Whitney, at the request of Elijah Hale, prepared a will, which was then signed and executed by him, in the first paragraph of which were these words, "hereby revoking all former writings for the purpose heretofore made by me, whether in shape of will, codicil, deed or otherwise." At the time this will was executed, Elijah Hale told Whitney that the word "deed" so put in referred to the deed made to the plaintiff, which was then in Whitney's custody, and that he meant to revoke and cancel it; and told Whitney never to...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Arnegaard v. Arnegaard
...Tyler v. Hall, 106 Mo. 313. The presumption is that the deed was placed in Hyde's possession as the agent for the grantor. Hale v Joslin, 134 Mass. 310; Ball Foreman, 37 Ohio St. 132. The deed to Knudt O. Arnegaard of the homestead was fraudulent as to the homestead rights of the plaintiff.......
-
O'Brien v. O'Brien
...such deed in the hands of such third person, intended absolutely to part with the control and dominion over the same." In Hale v. Joslin et al., 134 Mass. 310, a deed was in the hands of a third person by the grantor under the following statement: "I want you to take it and keep it as long ......
-
Dickson v. Miller
...v. Lind-quist, 102 Minn. 321, 113 N. W. 631;Thomas v. Williams, 105 Minn. 88, 117 N. W. 155. [4] 4. The defendants rely upon Hale v. Joslin, 134 Mass. 310. The court there found that there was no delivery sufficient to vest title, and that the depositary held the deed as agent of the granto......
-
Jones v. Old Colony Trust Co.
...which the petitioner relies the attempted creation of a trust or gift was held to be the equivalent of an agency or bailment. Hale v. Joslin, 134 Mass. 310;Nutt v. Morse, 142 Mass. 1, 6 N. E. 763;Stratton v. Athol Savings Bank, 213 Mass. 46, 99 N. E. 454;Russell v. Webster, 213 Mass. 491, 1......