Fidelity Insurance Trust & Safe Deposit Co. v. Moore

Citations

• 194 Pa. 617
• 45 A. 423
• 1900 Pa. LEXIS 452

Syllabus

<p>Trusts and trustees — Resulting trust — Evidence—Equity—Parent and child.</p> <p>The evidence in support of a resulting trust iu land in favor of a son whose father had taken title in his own name, but had permitted the son a certain dominion over the laud, must be clear, precise, convincing and satisfactory. It is not enough that it satisfies a jury, it must also satisfy the mind and conscience of the court sitting as a chancellor reviewing the testimony ; and if it fail in this respect it must bo withdrawn from the jury.</p> <p>Negotiations for the purchase of a farm were carried on by a son; the contract for the purchase of it was signed by him in his own name, but in the body of the contract it was recited that he executed it for his father. He paid the hand money on the contract, $5,000, with his own check, but he received his father’s check on that day for that amount. The price of the farm was $20,000, and the balance of the purchase money was secured by the father’s bond. The son bought the unexpired term of the tenant for a small consideration and entered into possession of the farm. The father expended over $700,000 in improvements contracted for by the son, payment of taxes, purchasing of blooded stock and various other matters on the farm. In the mean time he made declarations to strangers that he had bought the farm for the son, but took the title in his own name that he might keep “tab” on it. The son had no means of his own. The father was amply able and willing to pay. Held, that no trust resulted for the farm in favor of the son.</p>