Hannah B. Regan v. Henry Howe &Amp; Another
| Decision Date | 06 January 1877 |
| Court | United States State Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts Supreme Court |
| Parties | Hannah B. Regan v. Henry Howe & another |
Argued October 24, 1876
Bristol. Petition for partition. At the trial in the Superior Court, before Wilkinson, J., without a jury, the petitioner put in a deed from one Catharine T. Howe, to herself and the two respondents of the land in question, of one undivided third part thereof, and rested her case
The respondents then called Josiah C. Blaisdell, Esquire, who testified that in 1868, the petitioner, with the respondent Howe, came into his office, when she agreed to sell to Howe her third part of the premises for $ 300, and Howe was to clear off a mortgage for which the respondents were responsible; that in pursuance of that agreement he made a deed of warranty in the ordinary form from her to Howe, and the petitioner executed it in his office; that he agreed with the petitioner not to deliver it to Howe until the $ 300 had been paid, and the mortgage satisfied, and then the deed was to be given by him to Howe; that Howe paid the $ 300 to him and also satisfied the mortgage, and that the $ 300 was received by the petitioner; that it was about a year or fifteen months before the money was paid and the mortgage satisfied; that, one evening, after the $ 300 had been paid and the mortgage satisfied, the petitioner came into his office and asked for the deed she had made to Howe; and that he went to his safe, took out the deed and gave it to her she saying she wanted it to take to her father, the respondent Howe; that some time after, the respondent Howe came into his office and asked for the deed, and the witness handed to him what he supposed to be the deed, but afterwards the defendant brought back the deed so given to him by the witness, and the witness then remembered having given the deed to the petitioner, and went to the petitioner and asked her for the deed, but she refused, saying she never took the deed and never made a deed; that the deed was never recorded; and that he gave the deed to the petitioner when she called for it, supposing she would give it to her father.
There was also evidence that the petitioner said, soon after the deed was executed, that she had sold all her interest in the property to her father for $ 300; that afterwards the petitioner said she would go to Mr. Blaisdell's office and get her father's deed; and that she went up, and came back and held up a yellow envelope, and said that that was her father's deed; and that in 1870, the petitioner asked if her father had his deed, and said she would go up and get it for him.
The petitioner testified that she never gave any deed to the respondent Howe, and denied all the conversations testified to by the witnesses for the respondents; that she supposed and intended to give her father a life lease of the property; and denied that she received the deed from Mr. Blaisdell.
The respondent Tripp testified that the respondent Howe had told her that he had bought from the petitioner for $ 300, her...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Roberts v. Cyr.
...for the purpose of transmitting it to the lessee, there was warrant for finding a sufficient delivery to vest title in the lessee. Regan v. Howe, 121 Mass. 424. The opposite is when holding continues pending performance of a condition; then, in a legal sense, there is no delivery and the le......
-
Missouri Pacific Ry. Co. v. Tygard
...v. Meeker, 2 Conn. 302; Taylor v. Thomas, 13 Kas. 218; State Bk., etc., v. Evans, 15 N. J. L. 155; Shirley v. Ayres, 14 Ohio, 307; Regan v. Howe, 121 Mass. 424; Bishop on Contracts, 764; Campbell v. Wolf, 33 Mo. 459; Bowling v. Hax, 55 Mo. 448; 1 Daniel on Neg. Instruments, 54. BLACK, J. Th......
-
Sparks v. Taylor
...held the deeds for Meador Bros., which became effective to vest title in accordance with their terms in the vendees named therein. Regan v. Howe, 121 Mass. 424, Baum's Appeal, 113 Pa. 58, 4 Atl. 461. There is no evidence whatever which tended to show that Meador Bros. had notice of the clai......
-
Bingham v. White
...555; Thomas v. Thomas, 70 Colo. 29, 197 P. 243; Roberts' Appeal, 85 Pa. 84; Jones v. Jones (Mo. App.) 201 S. W. 557. See, also, Regan v. Howe, 121 Mass. 424, 426. Applying these rules to the facts of the present case, the certificates representing the shares were indorsed over by the decede......