Eastham v. Powell
Supreme Court of Arkansas
APPEAL from Madison Circuit Court in Chancery. J. M. Pittman, Judge. 1. While in most cases delivery of a deed should be ■shown, yet if the deed is found in the grantee’s hands, a delivery and acceptance is always presumed. Wash. Real Pr., p. 294. A conveyance may be made to a minor or lunatic, .and the law presumes acceptance by or for them.
Read the full summary
APPEAL from Madison Circuit Court in Chancery. J. M. Pittman, Judge. 1. While in most cases delivery of a deed should be ■shown, yet if the deed is found in the grantee’s hands, a delivery and acceptance is always presumed. Wash. Real Pr., p. 294. A conveyance may be made to a minor or lunatic, .and the law presumes acceptance by or for them. Ib., p. 291. 2. The facts in this case clearly sustain the presumption •of law that an advancement was made by the father to his •child. Story’s Eq. Jur., pp. 445-6, sec. 1202-3. Even if the daughter had been of sound mind an advancement would be…
1Opinion of the CourtCockrill, C. J.
Laura Eastham, who is- non compos,, arid her guardian, were made defendants to a suit by the appellee to foreclose a mortgage executed by Laura’s father, T. J. Eastham, the -complaint alleging that she claimed an interest in the mortgaged premises.
The guardian filed a cross complaint setting up paramount title in his ward. The cause was heard upon the pleadings and depositions, and the court decreed that Laura had no interest in the land.
1.Advancement: Presumption of: Rebutting evidence. The proof showed that the father had purchased the land and taken the deed in Laura’s name. The contention…
2Cited by14 opinions
- Ellis v. NewellSupreme Court of Iowa · 1903
- Northwestern Mutual Life Insurance v. WrightWisconsin Supreme Court · 1913
- Battle v. AndersSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1911
- Neal v. NealSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1937
- Cotton v. Citizens' BankSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1911
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.