Moore v. Wingate
Supreme Court of Missouri
Appeal from Linn Circuit Court. I. The fact that the grantor 'remained in possession after condition broken, is not sufficient. It must be shown that it was done with the intention to claim the forfeiture. (Williard vs. Henry, 2 N. H., 120.) The authorities which hold that a re-entry is not necessary, or that remaining in possession is presumedly holding for the forfeiture, like 5 Mass., 320, are based upon statutes like G. S. Mass., 1860, Oh. 134, § 3. • II.
Read the full summary
Appeal from Linn Circuit Court. I. The fact that the grantor 'remained in possession after condition broken, is not sufficient. It must be shown that it was done with the intention to claim the forfeiture. (Williard vs. Henry, 2 N. H., 120.) The authorities which hold that a re-entry is not necessary, or that remaining in possession is presumedly holding for the forfeiture, like 5 Mass., 320, are based upon statutes like G. S. Mass., 1860, Oh. 134, § 3. • II. Respondent has a remedy at law, and equity never lends its' aid to enforce a forfeiture. (4 Kent’s Com., 130; 2 Sto. Eq. § 1319;…
1Opinion of the CourtVories, Judge
On the 13th day of March, 1863, Daniel Grice, an old and infirm man, with his second wife, Sarah Grice, was residing on, and the owner of, a tract of land in Linn County in this State, described as the north-east quarter of the north-east quarter of section 26, township 59 of rañge 22. On that day said Grice and wife, by deed of that date, conveyed said land to the defendant, who was the son of the said Sarah, and the step-son of the said Daniel. The deed by which the land was conveyed contained this condition : “ This conveyance is made for the consideration that the said "William J. Wingate…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Stewart v. SeveranceSupreme Court of Missouri · 1869
- Warner v. BennettSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1863
- Jackson ex dem. Blanchard v. AllenNew York Supreme Court · 1824
- McVey v. McVeySupreme Court of Missouri · 1873
- Strouse v. DrennanSupreme Court of Missouri · 1867
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by28 opinions
- Lynn v. HookadaySupreme Court of Missouri · 1901
- Mahlstedt v. Ideal Lighting Co.Illinois Supreme Court · 1915
- Haydon v. St. Louis & San Francisco RailroadSupreme Court of Missouri · 1909
- Studdard v. WellsSupreme Court of Missouri · 1894
- Catron v. Scarritt Collegiate InstituteSupreme Court of Missouri · 1915
23 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.