Legal Opinion · Concurrence

Campbell v. Morgan

New York Supreme Court

Decided April 14, 1893Published

Case submitted on agreed statement. Controversy between Mary Ann Campbell and William Morgan, submitted on an agreed statement of facts pursuant to section 1279, Code Civil Proc. Judgment for Mrs. Campbell.

Read the full summary

Case submitted on agreed statement. Controversy between Mary Ann Campbell and William Morgan, submitted on an agreed statement of facts pursuant to section 1279, Code Civil Proc. Judgment for Mrs. Campbell. On the 30th day of November, 1850, William Jarvis and Eunice B., his wife, •conveyed to Peter Broadfoot, by a warranty deed dated that day, and recorded December 30, 1850, in the cleric’s office of the county of Westchester, in Boole 155 of Deeds, page 298, the fee of a lot of land in the then town of West Farms, 117 feet and 8 inches long by 100 feet in width. The grantee entered into…

1ConcurrenceVan Bbtjnt, P. J.

I concur. That a deed may be delivered by a grantor to a stranger, to be delivered to grantee after death of grantor, such second delivery relating back to the first delivery,, seems to have been long settled. Ruggles v. Lawson, 13 Johns. 284; Hatch v. Hatch, 9 Mass. 307; Shep. Touch, marg. pp. 58, 59; 2 Washb. Real Prop. marg. p. 586.

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Hatch v. HatchMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1812
  2. Cook v. HowardNew York Supreme Court · 1816

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API