Vigel v. Hopp
| Decision Date | 01 October 1881 |
| Citation | 104 U.S. 441,26 L.Ed. 765 |
| Parties | VIGEL v. HOPP |
| Court | U.S. Supreme Court |
APPEAL from the Supreme Court of the District of Columbia.
The facts are sufficiently stated in the opinion of the court.
Mr. Saul S. Henkle for the appellant.
There was no opposing counsel.
This is a suit in equity begun by the appellee to set aside a deed executed by her to the appellant, on the ground that the deed, though absolute on its face, was intended only as security for a debt, which has since been paid in full. There are numerous allegations of fraud, but the whole scope and purpose of the suit is to establish a trust, and get back the property in that way. The answer denies every allegation of fraud and trust, and insists that the deed was intended as an absolute conveyance, and not as security. This is responsive to the bill, and before the relief can be granted which is asked, these denials must be overcome by the satisfactory testimony of two witnesses, or of one witness corroborated by circumstances which are equivalent in weight to another. 2 Story, Eq., sect. 1528. The appellee is the only witness in support of the bill, and the corroborating circumstances are not, in our opinion, sufficient to overcome the answer. It will serve no useful purpose to enter into analysis of the testimony.
Decree reversed, and cause remanded with instructions to dismiss the bill.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Kennedy v. Custer
... ... or of one witness with corroborating circumstances equivalent ... in weight to that of another. Vigel v. Hopp, 104 ... U.S. 441, 26 L.Ed. 765; Union Railroad Co. v. Dull, ... 124 U.S. 173, 8 Sup.Ct. 433, 31 L.Ed. 417; Southern ... Development ... ...
-
Monroe Cattle Co v. Becker
...not sustained, if, indeed, the answer be not sufficient for that purpose without other testimony. Hughes v. Blake, 6 Wheat. 453; Vigel v. Hopp, 104 U. S. 441; Beals v. Railroad Co., 133 U. S. 290, 10 Sup. Ct. Rep. Upon the other hand, the answer charges that one H. C. Jacobs was county surv......
-
Snow v. Hazlewood
...as any rule applicable to the trial of cases in equity. Morrison v. Durr, 122 U.S. 518, 7 Sup.Ct. 1215, 30 L.Ed. 1225; Vigel v. Hopp, 104 U.S. 441, 26 L.Ed. 765. Codden v. Kimmell, 99 U.S. 201, 206, 25 L.Ed. 431, this rule is applied in a case where the bill attacked an assignment for fraud......
-
Wilcox v. El Banco Popular de Economias y Prestamos De San Juan, P.R.
...127 F. 62, 61 C.C.A. 598; Campbell v. Northwest Eckington Co., 229 U.S. 561, 574, 579, 33 Sup.Ct. 796, 57 L.Ed. 1330; Vigel v. Hopp, 104 U.S. 441, 26 L.Ed. 765; Clark's Executors v. Van Riemsdyk, 13 U.S. Cranch) 153, 160, 3 L.Ed. 688; 1 Whitehouse, Equity Practice, Sec. 282. The bill should......