McAdams v. McAdams
Ohio Supreme Court
Error to the Circuit Court of Logan county. The plaintiff below, Wilson McAdams, Sr., commenced this action on the 22d day of July, 1904, seeking' the reformation of a deed made and delivered by him to his son, James McAdams, defend ant below, plaintiff in error here, on the 29th day of August, 1899, which deed was upon the consideration of one dollar and natural love and affection.
Read the full summary
Error to the Circuit Court of Logan county. The plaintiff below, Wilson McAdams, Sr., commenced this action on the 22d day of July, 1904, seeking' the reformation of a deed made and delivered by him to his son, James McAdams, defend ant below, plaintiff in error here, on the 29th day of August, 1899, which deed was upon the consideration of one dollar and natural love and affection. The grantor in said deed alleged that the grantee, James McAdams, was his son, and was the attorney and confidential adviser of the grantor in making the said deed; that the grantor intended to convey the lands…
1Opinion of the CourtDavis, J.
The declarations of the grantor, made in the absence of the grantee, were not competent evidence to prove the alleged fraud. Gay v. Gay, 26 Ohio St., 402. Not so however the statements of the grantor, whether made before or after the signing of the deed, which tend to rebut the claim of fraud, such statements being admissions or declarations against interest.
It appears that the grantee in this case is a son of the grantor, that he is an attorney at law, that in some instances he had acted as his father’s attorney and adviser, and that in the matter of drafting this deed he was entrusted with…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Upton v. TribilcockSupreme Court of the United States · 1875
- Jackson ex dem. Russell v. CroyNew York Supreme Court · 1815
- Coffing v. TaylorIllinois Supreme Court · 1855
- Lies v. StubSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1837
- Haynes v. HarrimanWisconsin Supreme Court · 1903