Owens v. Williams

• Decision Date: 15 April 1902
• Citation: 41 S.E. 93,130 N.C. 165
• Court: North Carolina Supreme Court
• Parties: OWENS et al. v. WILLIAMS et al.

41 S.E. 93

130 N.C. 165

OWENS et al.

v.WILLIAMS et al.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

April 15, 1902.

TRUSTS—AGREEMENTS IN PAROL—ENFORCEMENT—STATUTE OF FRAUDS—LIMITATIONS-LIABILITY OF TRUSTEE—RENTS AND PROFITS.

1. Where land is redeemed from execution sale, under parol agreement between the redemptioner and the owner that the former will reconvey on repayment of the purchase money, and the heirs of such owner tender the amount due and interest, they are entitled to a conveyance of the land, since the redemptioner, by such purchase, became a trustee for their benefit.

2. Where a parol trust is established, it is as binding as if in writing, as the statute of frauds does not apply to declarations of trust.

it. Where one who redeems land takes a conveyance to himself on agreement to reconvey to the owner on being reimbursed for the purchase money and payment of an indebtedness due his wife in addition to the purchase money, that such indebtedness was included in the consideration for the reconveyance does not affect the redemptioner's trust relation or obligation to reconvey, since he held the legal title merely as security for the purchase money and such indebtedness.

4. Where laud was conveyed to a redemptioner in 1886, and he agreed to reconvey to the owner on payment of the purchase money, and the heirs of the owner remained in possession until 1890, as the redemptioner held the laud under an express trust the statute of limitation was not applicable, especially in view of such possession.

5. Where a redemptioner takes a conveyance of land under agreement with the owner to reconvey on repayment of the purchase money, he, being a trustee for such owner, must account to the owner's heirs for rents and profits while the land was in his possession, or in possession of others to whom he had conveyed it, and whom he had placed in possession.

6. Where land is conveyed to a redemptioner under agreement to reconvey to the owner on repayment of the purchase money, and parties to whom he has conveyed the land in violation of the trust are parties to a suit by the owner's heirs to compel a conveyance to them, the redemptiouer's conveyance may be declared void, and a conveyance pursuant to the trust enforced.

Douglas, J., dissenting.

Appeal from superior court, Sampson county; Allen, Judge.'

Action by T. E. Owens and others against Edward Williams and others. There was a judgment in favor of plaintiffs, and defendants appeal. Affirmed.

Faison & Grady and Shepherd & Shepherd, for appellants.

F. R. Cooper and Geo. E. Butler, for appellees.

FUKCHES, C. J. This is an action to declare and enforce a parol trust. The record discloses the following facts: In December, 1886, the land in controversy was sold under execution as the property of E. B. Owens, by the sheriff of Sampson county, when Henry E. Faison became the purchaser at the price of $150, this being the amount of the judgment under which it was sold. Faison manifested a willingness to reconvey the land to Owens upon the payment to him of the amount he had paid, to wit, $150. But Owens, not having the money to redeem his land, applied to the defendant Edward Williams, who was his son-in-law, to redeem if for him, and to take the title thereto from Faison, and hold the same until he (Owens) could repay him, when he would reconvey to Owens. Owens, it seems, had been the guardian of his daughter, the wife of the defendant Edward Williams, and still owed something on said guardianship; and the defendant Williams agreed to redeem the land from Faison as requested by his father-in-law, and hold the title until his father-in-law should pay him the $150 paid Faison, and the balance due on the guardianship of his wife, and he was to convey to Owens when these were paid, with the further provision that, if Owens did not repay the said $150 and balance due on the guardianship, the defendant Williams should convey the land to his children, who were also the children of his said wife and the grandchildren of E. B. Owens. Williams paid the $150 to Faison under this agreement, and took a deed from Faison for the land, which is shown to have been worth between $1,250 and $3,000 at that time. E. B. Owens remained in the possession and enjoyment of this land until his death in June, 1890, and after his death the plaintiff went into possession thereof, and so remained until 1896, when the defendant took possession and afterwards put the other defendants in possession of the land, who still hold and occupy the same, and to whom he afterwards made a deed. The defendant Williams testified that said deed was dated January, 1900, registered September 11, 1900, and was without consideration. And the case states that "about January, 1900, the plaintiffs requested said Williams to render an account of the rents and profits of said land and permit them to pay any balance that might be due him, and for him to reconvey said laud to the heirs of E. B. Owens. The defendant Edward Williams failing to do this, the plaintiffs thereupon offered to repay him the entire amount due, interest and costs, and ask that he reconvey to them said land, which the defendant refused to do"; and this action was commenced in September thereafter. The following issues were submitted to the jury and found as indicated: (1) Was there a parol agreement between Edward Williams and E. B. Owens that Williams would buy the land and that Owens might redeem it? Yes. (2) Was it agreed between them that Owens was to repay the purchase money? Yes. (3) Was it agreed that Owens was also to pay the amount he owed Williams' wife, Mary Alice, as guardian? Yes. (4) Was it agreed that if Owens failed to redeem that Williams was to make a deed to the children of said wife? Yes. (5) If so, has Williams executed a deed to said children accordingly? Yes. (6) Was any time...