Bailey v. Hill

Citations

• 77 Va. 492
• 1 Va. Dec. 538
• 1883 Va. LEXIS 83

Syllabus

<p>1. Deeds-Construction-In the construction of every instrument, the paramount rule is to construe it so as, if possible, to give effect to every part of it, and in order to discover the intention of the parties, to look, not only to the terms of the instrument, but to the subject matter and to the surrounding circumstances.</p> <p>2. Idem-Idem-Post nuptial settlements-Jus disponendi.-Where, under deed of settlement, wife could use and dispose of only the annual rents, issues and profits, and by and with the consent and concurrence of the trustee in due form, alienate, in order to reinvest the proceeds of the corpus, the trustee and the wife cannot together validly enter into a deed of trust to secure loans and advances, which result in absolute alienation of the corpus, and that too, not for the purpose of reinvestment, as contemplated in the settlement. Bank of Greensboro v. Chambers & als., 30 Gratt. 202.</p> <p>3. Trust Deeds-Incompetent trustee.-If the trustee be insane, neither alone nor in conjunction with the c. q. t., can he do any valid act.</p> <p>4. Negotiable Notes-Sale-Usurious, when.-Where maker of negotiable note payable to his own order, endorses it and sells it through a third person at a rate of interest greater than that allowed by law, the transaction is not usurious, provided the purchaser does not know the character of the note, or that it is sold for the benefit of the maker. Whit-worth v. Adams, 5 Rand. 333. But if the purchaser is affected with such knowledge by the circumstances, then the transaction is usurious.</p>