Lynch v. Lynch

• Decision Date: 13 June 1924
• Citation: 249 Mass. 543,144 N.E. 375
• Parties: LYNCH et al. v. LYNCH et al.
• Court: United States State Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts Supreme Court

249 Mass. 543

144 N.E. 375

LYNCH et al.

v.LYNCH et al.

Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts, Suffolk.

June 13, 1924.

Appeal from Superior Court, suffolk County; M. Morton, Judge.

Suit in equity by Daniel J. Lynch and another against Michael J. Lynch and others. From a decree, named defendant and wife appeal. Affirmed.W. J. Day, of Boston (J. W. King, of Boston, of counsel), for appellants.

S. Gottlieb, of Boston, for appellees.

BRALEY, J.

The defendants, with the exception of Michael J. Lynch and Mary Lynch, his wife, in their answer admit the material allegations of the bill and further state ‘that they desire to have carried out the agreement referred to in the bill of complaint, and desire that the proportional interests of the plaintiffs in said real estate be established in accordance with said agreement.’ But the two above-named defendants in their ‘second substitute answer,’ while admitting the allegations in the first paragraph, substantially deny the material allegations of the remaining seven paragraphs and also plead the statute of frauds. The judge, however, whose findings of fact on the evidence which was taken by a commissioner are not attacked by them, states that the plaintiffs, Daniel J. Lynch, James Lynch, Jr., and the defendant Michael Lynch are brothers, and being desirous of providing a home for their parents who were about to emigrate to this country, they purchased the real property which is described in the bill for $2,800; and that by mutual consent and agreement a deed of the property was taken in the name of their father, James Lynch. Michael advanced $800 of the amount of cash required for the purchase, and it was agreed between the brothers that each of the plaintiffs should pay what he could towards the mortgage of $2,000 to which the property was subject, and that after the death of their parents each brother was to be paid from the proceeds of the sale of the property the amount which he had contributed towards the purchase price. While the father may not have been informed of the exact terms under which the conveyance was made, yet he, as well as all the family, knew that it was not a gift, and that his sons had an interest in the property.

James Lynch, the father, died intestate on February 12, 1923, leaving a widow who is one of the defendants. The plaintiff Daniel J. Lynch from time to time contributed various sums amounting to $520 toward the liquidation of the mortgage; and the plaintiff James Lynch, Jr., also has paid $800 in the same way and for the same purpose. The defendant Michael J. Lynch received these payments and applied them in satisfaction of the mortgage with accured interest, and the remainder of the mortgage debt was contributed by him. The mortgage note or debt was paid on March 8, 1911; but the mortgage was not canceled. It was assigned to Michael without the knowledge or consent of the plaintiffs, and on March 29, 1911, James Lynch, the father, gave a quitclaim deed to Michael which was not recorded until February 5, 1923, a week before the intestate's death. On March 27, 1923, without consideration, Michael conveyed the property to his wife, the defendant Mary Lynch.

[1][2][3] It is clear on these findings, which are amply supported by the testimony of the plaintiff Daniel J. Lynch, that Michael secretly acquired title from his father with knowledge that the plaintiffs had contributed substantial payments toward the purchase price in accordance with the original understanding and agreement of the parties, and that Mary Lynch, not being a...