Vermillion v. Parsons
Missouri Court of Appeals
Appeal from Barry Oircnit Court. — Hon. H. C. Pepper, Judge. (1) It is essential to a valid parol gift that it go into effect at once and completely. Mere words signifying an intent to transfer in the future are insufficient. R. S. 1899, sec. 3400; Spencer v. Vance, 57 Mo. 427;' "Wheatley v. Abbott, 32 Miss. 343; Gfratside v. Phalman, 45 Mo.
Read the full summary
Appeal from Barry Oircnit Court. — Hon. H. C. Pepper, Judge. (1) It is essential to a valid parol gift that it go into effect at once and completely. Mere words signifying an intent to transfer in the future are insufficient. R. S. 1899, sec. 3400; Spencer v. Vance, 57 Mo. 427;' "Wheatley v. Abbott, 32 Miss. 343; Gfratside v. Phalman, 45 Mo. App. 160; Chevallier v. Wilson, 1 Texas 161; Brink v. Gould, 7 Lans, 425. (2) The parol gift made by L. C. Parsons and wife to Edna of the goods in controversy, unaccompanied.by actual possession," is void as against Parsons’ creditors without notice, and…
1Opinion of the CourtGoode, J.
This appeal concerns the ownership of a piano claimed by Edna Parsons, the interpleader, but attached as the property of her father, L. C. Parsons, the defendant. There was other property involved in the case originally which is no longer in dispute.
Two points are made by the appellant: first, that a demurrer should have been sustained to the inter-pleader’s case; second, that the jury ignored the evidence and found the verdict from prejudice.
The testimony of the interpleader and her mother was that the piano was given to the interpleader by her father when she was seven years of age and…
2Cited by3 opinions
- Clarkson v. GarveyMissouri Court of Appeals · 1913
- O'Donnell v. United Railways Co.Missouri Court of Appeals · 1911
- Van Loon v. St. Joseph Railway, Light, Heat & Power Co.Missouri Court of Appeals · 1913