Warren v. Tobey
| Decision Date | 27 April 1875 |
| Citation | 32 Mich. 45 |
| Court | Michigan Supreme Court |
| Parties | William W. Warren v. Benjamin F. Tobey |
Submitted on Briefs April 22, 1875
Error to Shiawassee Circuit.
Judgment reversed, with the costs of both courts, and judgment entered for the plaintiff, and cause remanded.
Spaulding & Cranson, for plaintiff in error.
Hugh McCurdy, for defendant in error.
Warren brought ejectment against Tobey for a piece of land in Shiawassee county.
The cause was tried by the court without a jury. The facts were found as follows: The premises were conveyed on the 18th of January, 1855, by Shepard Knapp and wife to Horton Warren the father of the plaintiff, and the deed was recorded in August, 1858. Horton Warren went into possession and continued to occupy the premises until his death, which occurred in 1870 or 1871.
In February, 1862, he executed a deed of the premises to the plaintiff. There was no actual consideration, though one of six hundred dollars or eight hundred dollars was expressed.
This deed was delivered to the plaintiff, and without getting the same recorded, he handed it to his sister to keep for him. At the time when the deed was made some talk occurred between the plaintiff and his father, that the latter might occupy and use the place during his natural life, but no agreement was made. In July, 1862, or some five months later the father asked the daughter to allow him to see the deed, and she thereupon handed it to him, and he put it in the stove and burnt it.
In 1870 or 1871 the father died intestate, leaving the plaintiff and several other children as his heirs, and when this suit was commenced, March 12, 1874, the defendant was in possession of the premises, and claimed to be in as administrator of the father's estate.
There was no evidence that the defendant was administrator, or had ever been authorized by the probate court to take possession of the realty belonging to the estate, and no title or claim of title was set up by defendant.
Upon these facts the court gave judgment for defendant.
The judgment was clearly wrong:
First The facts found established a plain legal title in the plaintiff as heir at law to an undivided interest which was recoverable in the action independently of any right based upon the deed of 1862, and the defendant wholly failed to make out any fact to support his possession or justify him in resisting the plaintiff's...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
In re Rudell Estate
...is valid, though no actual consideration passed...." Hoskey v. Hoskey, 7 Mich.App. 122, 126, 151 N.W.2d 227 (1967); see also Warren v. Tobey, 32 Mich. 45 (1875). In the instant case, the parties have presented no evidence of any outstanding claims against the property by creditors of the de......
-
Pinkham v. Pinkham
... ... Atwood, 52 Conn. 512; Bunch v. Nicks, 50 Ark ... 367; Shackelton v. Sebree, 86 Ill. 616; Barber ... v. Milner, 43 Mich. 248; Warren v. Tobey, 32 ... Mich. 45; Jackson v. Cleveland, 15 Mich. 94; ... Wallace v. Harris, 32 Mich. 380; Gale v ... Gould, 40 Mich. 515; Wilson v ... ...
-
Stamp v. Steele
...grantor and any subsequent grantee or mortgagee under him. Page v. Kendrick, 10 Mich. 300;Keeler v. Ullrich, 32 Mich. 88;Warren v. Tobey, 32 Mich. 45;Wallace v. Harris, 32 Mich. 380;Gale v. Gould, 40 Mich. 515. In support of the plaintiff's claim that the instrument was sufficient to convey......
-
Ball v. Tompkins
...would be open to them if the property could not be sold under the license at all. McDaniels v. Walker, 44 Mich. 83, 6 N.W. 112; Warren v. Tobey, 32 Mich. 45. And they file their bill in equity for partition, notwithstanding the estate remains unsettled. Campau v. Campau, 19 Mich. 116. On th......