Roe v. Roe
| Decision Date | 04 November 1929 |
| Citation | 124 So. 734,98 Fla. 840 |
| Parties | ROE v. ROE et al. |
| Court | Florida Supreme Court |
Suit by Mary Lucile Roe, as executrix of the estate of Alfred Roe deceased, against Charles A. Roe and others. Decree for defendants, and complainant appeals.
Affirmed.
See also, 95 Fla. 488, 117 So. 108.
Syllabus by the Court
Debt may be subject of gift by creditor to debtor and is generally referred to as 'forgiveness of debt'; delivery necessary to gift of debt may be accomplished by giving receipt not under seal though debt is evidenced by specialty by surrendering debt instrument, or by destroying it; that creditor reserves right to interest on debt does not affect validity of gift of debt; gift may be made of portion of debt evidenced by execution and delivery of receipt therefor creditor's acceptance each year of less amount than interest due on debt and giving receipt in full constitutes valid gift of remainder of interest due; though part payment of debt cannot constitute accord and satisfaction, gift may be made of balance after payment of part. A debt may be the subject of a gift by the creditor to his debtor, and is generally referred to as a 'forgiveness of the debt.' The delivery may be accomplished by giving a receipt, even though not under seal, and the debt is evidenced by a specialty, by surrendering the instrument evidencing the debt, or even by destroying it, if this is done with intent to cancel the debt; and the fact that the creditor reserves the right to interest on the debt does not affect the validity of the gift. A gift may be made of a portion of a debt, evidenced by the execution and delivery of a receipt for that part, and the acceptance by a creditor each year of a less amount than the interest due on the debt, and giving a receipt therefor stating that it is for interest in full for that year, shows an intention to give the remainder of the interest then due, and constitutes a valid gift thereof. And although part payment of a debt cannot constitute an accord and satisfaction, a gift may be made of the balance after payment of part.
Mortgagee's delivery of note and mortgage stating he gave them to mortgagor, and that all mortgagee asked was that mortgagor pay him interest while mortgagee lived, constituted valid gift. There is a valid gift of the principal where a mortgagee delivers the note and mortgage to the mortgagor, saying:
Delivery to third person as agent or trustee for donee, is as effective as manual delivery direct to donee. Delivery of the res of a gift to a third person as agent or trustee, for the use of the donee, under circumstances indicating that the donor relinquished all control over the property and intended to vest title in the donee, is as effective as manual delivery direct to the donee.
Appeal from Circuit Court, De Soto County; W. J. Barker, judge.
Mabry, Reaves & Carlton, of Tampa, for appellant.
Leitner & Leitner, of Arcadia, for appellees.
In this case the executrix of the estate of Alfred Roe, deceased, filed bill to require an accounting from the defendants and delivery to the complainant by the defendants of certain notes made by the defendant Charles A. Roe to deceased, during the lifetime of the deceased. The defendant Charles A. answered averring in short that the deceased had made a gift of the notes to the defendant Charles A. before his death and had delivered the notes, in the presence of Charles A., to Arthur I. Roe with the directions, understanding, and agreement that the principal of the notes was a gift then and there to Charles A. Roe, but that Charles A. should pay the interest to the donor during his lifetime. Other defendants answered making allegations to the same effect. An examiner was appointed and testimony was taken, report made to the court, and a decree entered in favor of the defendants. From which decree appeal is taken.
It is contended by the appellant that the alleged gift was...
To continue reading
Request your trial
- In re Franz' Estate
- Lange v. Lange
-
Day v. Norman
...affected the validity of the gift as a gift inter vivos if actually he had collected the rents up to the time of his death. Roe v. Roe, 98 Fla. 840, 124 So. 734. In such a situation the entry of a final decree upon Bill and Answer is appropriate and should be encouraged in the interest of t......
-
Lowry v. Florida Nat. Bank of Jacksonville
...HOBSON, Justice (concurring specially). It is my opinion that this case is controlled by our decision in the case of Roe v. Roe, 98 Fla. 840, 124 So. 734, and not by Webster v. St. Petersburg Federal Savings & Loan Association, 155 Fla. 412, 20 So.2d 400. It is further my view that the fact......