Swendick v. Swendick
Decision Date | 31 May 1930 |
Docket Number | 6 Div. 553. |
Citation | 128 So. 593,221 Ala. 337 |
Parties | SWENDICK v. SWENDICK. |
Court | Alabama Supreme Court |
Appeal from Circuit Court, Jefferson County; William M. Walker Judge.
Bill to establish and enforce a resulting trust by W. M. Swendick against Ruth Swendick. From a decree overruling a demurrer to the bill, respondent appeals.
Reversed and remanded.
Charles W. Greer and George Frey, both of Birmingham, for appellant.
W. P McCrossin and T. J. Lamar, both of Birmingham, for appellee.
This bill is filed by the husband against the wife to establish and enforce a resulting trust to the extent of an undivided one-half interest in "Lot thirteen (13), Pettyjohn Subdivision of Block fourteen (14) of J. M. Ware's Subdivision, according to the Map of said Subdivision as recorded in the office of the Probate Judge of Jefferson County, Alabama."
As a predicate for this relief, the bill avers that: "After the Complainant and Respondent were married and had lived together for quite a while the Complainant bought a piece of property or real estate; that subsequently the property so acquired was exchanged for (the lot in question) as a part of the purchase price of the said lot so recently acquired in addition to said real estate given in exchange, there were other, further and large amounts of money required to be paid to the vendor and all of which was paid by the Complainant." That all moneys that went into both pieces of real estate were furnished by him out of his wages, and "by mistake or inadvertently the title to said real estate was taken in, and is held by the Respondent, when the real intention was to be that the property was to be treated as community property," etc. (Italics supplied.)
It is well settled that: 26 R. C. L. 1225, § 71, and authorities cited under notes 8 and 9.
The presumption that an advancement or gift was intended is not however a presumption of law, but one of fact, and may be overcome by proof of the real intent of the parties as reflected in the conditions and circumstances attending the transaction. Smithsonian Institution v. Meech, 169 U.S. 398, 18 S.Ct. 396, 42 L.Ed. 793; Wright v....
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Sykes v. Sykes, 6 Div. 393
...intention to make an advancement or gift to the wife or child. Johnson v. Johnson, 259 Ala. 550, 552, 67 So.2d 841; Swendick v. Swendick, 221 Ala. 337, 338, 339, 128 So. 593; Long v. King, 117 Ala. 423, 430, 431, 23 So. 534; Hatton v. Landman, 28 Ala. 127, 135. 'When, therefore, such relati......
-
Haavik v. Farnell
...resulting trust arises and the burden was on complainant to allege that Lot 21 was not a gift by him to his then wife. Swendick v. Swendick, 221 Ala. 337, 128 So. 593. In regard to Lot 21 the complainant does aver that he permitted the title to be taken in the name of his then wife 'believi......
-
Adair v. Adair
...and circumstances show the allowance to be burdensome and an equitable right of the husband to have modification. In Swendick v. Swendick, 221 Ala. 337, 128 So. 593, 594, it was observed: 'It is well settled that: 'Where a person who purchases land in the name of another and pays the consid......
-
Taylor v. First Nat. Bank of Tuskaloosa
...intended, or a trust results, depends on the character of the transaction at its inception. (Citations Omitted)' Swendick v. Swendick, 221 Ala. 337, 338, 339, 128 So. 593, 594. ' § 164. It is further to be observed that voluntary conveyances to a wife or child were never within the rule tha......