Grimes v. Orrand
Tennessee Supreme Court
EEOM CANNON. In Chancery at Woodbury, before Baeclay M. 'Tillman, Ch. cited i Broom’s Legal Maxims, 238, 395; Mead v. Fite, 8 Hum,, 328; Stowe v. Ward, 3 Hawks., Law and Eq., 604; JSuss v. Stephens, 51 Penn.
Read the full summary
EEOM CANNON. In Chancery at Woodbury, before Baeclay M. 'Tillman, Ch. cited i Broom’s Legal Maxims, 238, 395; Mead v. Fite, 8 Hum,, 328; Stowe v. Ward, 3 Hawks., Law and Eq., 604; JSuss v. Stephens, 51 Penn. St. B., 282; 2 Cold., 136. cited: Shields v. Mitchell, 10 Yer., 1; Farrer v. Bridges, 5 Hum., 411; Morgan v. Elam, 4 Yer., 413. cited: Bacon’s Abr., (by Bou-vier,) 512, title Grant, CL and note; Perk., § 56; 1 Pick., 30; Finley v. Hambl1 Marsh., 293; Vaughn, 199; 4 Cruise, 218; Shaw v. Lord, 12 Mass., 447; Flail v. Leonard, 1 Pick., 514; Davis v. Hayden, 9 Mass., 514; Boon v. Moore, 14…
1Opinion of the CourtFeebmAN, J.
This bill is filed to assert a title to 52 acres of land, conveyed by William Grimes, the grandfather of complainant, by deed dated 14th August,,1845, to -the “heirs of Britton Grimes; the said Britton being at the time liv'ing, and as the bill alleges, a drunken spendthrift.
The deed is entitled “a deed of gift,” and conveys the land to the heirs of Britton Grimes, in consideration of love and affection. At the time of this conveyance, the said Britton had but one child born, to-wit: the complainant, Jemima; but another was born, perhaps within three weeks of the making of said deed, who only…
2Cited by6 opinions
- Dalton v. EllerTennessee Supreme Court · 1925
- Smith v. SmithTennessee Supreme Court · 1901
- Harwell v. HarwellTennessee Supreme Court · 1924
- Thomason v. SmithCourt of Appeals of Tennessee · 1928
- Arrington v. RoperCourt of Appeals of Tennessee · 1877
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.