McLaughlin v. Rice

• Court: Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts
• Writing for the Court: LATHROP, J.
• Citation: McLaughlin v. Rice, 185 Mass. 212, 70 N.E. 52 (Mass. 1904)
• Decision Date: 27 February 1904
• Parties: McLAUGHLIN et al. v. RICE.

185 Mass. 212

70 N.E. 52

McLAUGHLIN et al. v. RICE.

Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts, Suffolk.

February 27, 1904

COUNSEL

Henry J. Dubois and George A. King, for plaintiffs.

Harrison M. Davis, for defendant.

OPINION

LATHROP J.

1. The first exception in this case and the first request for instructions raise the question whether, when land is conveyed by deed to A. and B., evidence is admissible to show that the grantees are husband and wife. We have no doubt that such evidence is admissible. If it were not, then a deed from a husband directly to his wife, which did not describe her as such, would be a valid deed, which could not for a moment be contended. In Morris v. McCarty, 158 Mass. 11, 32 N.E. 938, a deed was made to A. and B., the latter being described as the wife of A. It was held that, as B. was not in fact the wife of A the grantees did not take an estate by entireties. It is the fact, and not the description or want of description, which determines the question. The first exception must therefore be overruled, and the first request for instructions was properly refused.

2. The third request for instructions was also properly refused. The deed being to a man and his wife, they took an estate by entireties, and not as tenants in common. The deed was executed in 1878, and, as the law then stood, the rights of the grantees, they being husband and wife, were the same as at common law. Gen. St. 1860, c. 89, §§ 13, 14. See, also Pub. St. 1882, c. 126,§§ 5, 6. It was not until St. 1885, p 679, c. 237, § 1, that the law was changed. In construing all conveyances prior to that statute, it has been held that a conveyance to a husband and wife conveyed an estate by entireties. Pray v. Stebbins, 141 Mass. 219, 4 N.E. 824, 55 Am. Rep. 462; Donahue v. Hubbard, 154 Mass. 537, 28 N.E. 909, 14 L. R. A. 123, 26 Am. St. Rep. 271; Morris v. McCarty, 158 Mass. 11, 32...