Joslin v. Goddard

• Decision Date: 05 January 1905
• Citation: Joslin v. Goddard, 72 N. E. 948, 187 Mass. 165 (Mass. 1905)
• Parties: JOSLIN v. GODDARD et al.
• Court: United States State Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts Supreme Court

187 Mass. 165

72 N.E. 948

JOSLIN v. GODDARD et al.

Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts, Worcester.

Jan, 5, 1905

COUNSEL

Chas.

Haggerty and J. R. Kane, for appellants.

John S Gould, for appellee.

OPINION

BARKER J.

The plaintiff and the two defendants are the only children and heirs of Mary A. Goddard, who died intestate on December 19 1899, at the age of nearly 83 years having been a widow for many years. In the present position of the action, the turning point is as to the validity of two deeds executed by her on June 6, 1896. One of these deeds purported to quitclaim to the defendants all the grantor's right, title, and interest, after her death, in certain land, in trust to pay over the net income to the plaintiff during her life, and upon her death to turn over the land to themselves, free of trust. The other deed quitclaimed to the defendants certain other lands, reserving and excepting to the grantor during her natural life the use occupation, income, enjoyment, and control of the lands quitclaimed. The lands described in the two deeds constituted all of the grantor's real estate. The bill asks to have them declared void, and for an accounting of the rents and profits of the lands for the time which has elapsed since the grantor's death, upon the ground that the plaintiff and the defendants are tenants in common, as the heirs at law of the grantor. Certain allegations as to personalty alleged to have been owned by Mrs. Goddard at the time of her decease have in the course of the proceedings become immaterial to our decision. After issue joined, the cause was sent by the superior court to a master to find the facts and state the account, and make report thereof, together with so much of the evidence as either party might request. Upon the coming in of the master's report, it was recommitted and a supplementary report was made, to which the defendants filed exceptions, which were overruled, and a final decree was entered for the plaintiff. The cause is here upon the defendants' appeal from the order overruling their exceptions to the supplementary report of the master and from the final decree, and it has been considered upon the briefs submitted by the parties. The defendants' brief raises no questions except those as to the validity of the deeds of June 6, 1896, and we treat all others as waived.

The decree declares that the two deeds are void because there was no delivery of the same in the lifetime of the grantor, and for other reasons, which, in the view we hold, are now immaterial. As all the evidence is before us upon the master's report, we have examined it with care, to see whether the declaration that the deeds are void for want of delivery shall stand.

At the time of their execution, Mrs. Goddard was living in the same house with the two defendants, and this house was in the same yard with their business...