Partridge v. Partridge

Citation119 S.W. 415,220 Mo. 321
PartiesPARTRIDGE et al. v. PARTRIDGE et al.
Decision Date18 May 1909
CourtUnited States State Supreme Court of Missouri

Appeal from Circuit Court, Nodaway County; Wm. C. Ellison, Judge.

Action by John T. Partridge and others against Elizabeth Partridge and others. Judgment for defendants. Plaintiffs appeal. Affirmed.

Geo. W. Partridge and Jos. W. Sayler, for appellants. T. A. Cummins, for respondents.

GANTT, P. J.

This is a suit by the children and heirs at law of James M. Partridge, deceased, for partition of the south half of the southwest quarter of section 33, township 64, range 34, in Nodaway county, against Elizabeth Partridge, widow of said James M. Partridge, deceased, and her children by a former marriage with John C. Smith, deceased.

Plaintiffs state, and the evidence tended to show, that the said John C. Smith died seised of the said tract of land, leaving as his widow Elizabeth Smith, since intermarried with and now the widow of James M. Partridge, and the following named children, to wit, Richard Smith, Margaret Smith, Mary Smith, Anna Smith, and Agnes Smith.

John C. Smith, by his last will, duly probated, devised this land to his said widow and children in equal shares. After the marriage of Mrs. Smith to James M. Partridge, and during said marriage, James M. Partridge purchased the undivided one-sixth interest of Richard and Margaret Smith, two of said devisees, being an undivided two-sixths of said tract. Afterwards, on March 7, 1895, James M. Partridge, having no other property than said one-third of said 80 acres, attempted to convey the same to his wife, said Elizabeth Partridge, but as is alleged, by mistake of the scrivener the interest of said James M. Partridge was described as "all their undivided shares in the eighty acres of land situated in section 33, township 64, range 34, in the county of Nodaway, and state of Missouri." This deed was made to Agnes Smith as a conduit, and the said Agnes then conveyed the same to her mother, but the last-mentioned conveyance was never recorded and was lost, but the said Agnes Smith, who was at the time intermarried with one Doran, executed and delivered to her mother another deed to said interest in order to perfect the title of record in said Elizabeth. James M. Partridge died in 1898, and the said Elizabeth has been in the actual and exclusive possession of said tract up to the commencement of this suit in November, 1905. In their answer defendants ask to have the deed of James M. Partridge to Agnes Smith for said Elizabeth Partridge corrected and reformed in the description of said land, so as to conform to the intention and agreement of said James M. Partridge, and so that the same shall read: "All their undivided shares in the eighty acres of land situated in section 33, township 64, range 34, being the south half of the southwest quarter of said section." The circuit court decreed a correction of said deed, and found that plaintiffs, as the heirs at law of James M. Partridge, had no interest or title in said tract, and dismissed their bill. From this decree the...

To continue reading

Request your trial
18 cases
  • Wilkerson v. Wann
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Missouri
    • April 10, 1929
    ...Only deeds based on a valuable or meritorious consideration will move the court to reform a deed. Mudd v. Dillon, 166 Mo. 110; Partridge v. Partridge, 220 Mo. 321; Hutsell v. Crews, 138 Mo. 1; Crawley v. Crafton, 193 Mo. 421. (5) The only way to complete a gift of land is by the delivery of......
  • White v. Reading
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Missouri
    • April 7, 1922
    ...... for a valuable consideration. Hutsel v. Crews, 138. Mo. 5; Crawley v. Crafton, 193 Mo. 431; Partridge v. Partridge, 220 Mo. 325. . .          Hostetter & Haley for respondent. . .          (1) The. deeds are void for the ......
  • Federal Land Bank v. McColgan, 32286.
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Missouri
    • April 20, 1933
    ......The respondents relied upon Hutsell v. Crewse, 138 Mo. 1, 39 S.W. 449; Crawley v. Crafton, 193 Mo. 421, 91 S.W. 1027, and Partridge v. Partridge, 220 Mo. 321, 119 S.W. 415, 132 Am. St. Rep. 584. But this court in the Hood case distinguished the three cited cases in these words ......
  • Federal Land Bank of St. Louis v. McColgan
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Missouri
    • April 20, 1933
    ......The respondents relied upon Hutsell v. Crewse, 138 Mo. 1, 39 S.W. 449; Crawley v. Crafton, 193 Mo. 421, 91 S.W. 1027, and Partridge v. Partridge, 220 Mo. 321, 119 S.W. 415, 132 Am. St. Rep. 584. But this court in the Hood case distinguished the three. cited cases in these words ......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT