Bassett v. Brown
Supreme Court of New Hampshire
In Equity. The substance of the bill is, that in November, 1875, one John Marsh and his wife Polly, by warranty deed in common form, conveyed their homestead, of the value of $400, to the defendant, and in consideration thereof she gave them a bond, in the sum of $400, to nurse and care for them during their lives, with the condition that the deed should be void if she did not fulfil the obligations of the bond; that the defendant abandoned John and Polly, April 7, 1-879,…
Read the full summary
In Equity. The substance of the bill is, that in November, 1875, one John Marsh and his wife Polly, by warranty deed in common form, conveyed their homestead, of the value of $400, to the defendant, and in consideration thereof she gave them a bond, in the sum of $400, to nurse and care for them during their lives, with the condition that the deed should be void if she did not fulfil the obligations of the bond; that the defendant abandoned John and Polly, April 7, 1-879, without any cause on their part, and thereafter refused to render to them the care and service required by the bond,…
1Opinion of the CourtBlodgett, J.
The bill makes no case for the reformation of the defendant’s deed. Doubtless a deed can be reformed in cases of fraud or- mistake, but this bill alleges neither, and, so far as it appears, the parties to the deed and bond gave and got just the security they intended. “A deed cannot be reformed in equity where it appears to have been made according to the intention and understanding of the parties at the time of its execution.” Bradford v. Bradford, 54 N. H. 463: Hunt v. Rousmaniere, 1 Pet. 1, 13-17. The fact that the bond was not as good a security as might have been selected, affords no…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Hunt v. RhodesSupreme Court of the United States · 1828
3Cited by1 opinion
- Davison v. DavisonSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1901