Galbraith v. Galbraith

Citations

• 190 Pa. 225
• 42 A. 683
• 1899 Pa. LEXIS 1009

Syllabus

<p>Trust and trustees — Resulting trust — Responsive answer — Sufficiency of evidence.</p> <p>If a person purchases an estate with his own money, and the deed is taken in the name of another, a trust of the land results, by presumption or implication of law and without any agreement, to him who advances the money. Such trusts are not within the statute of frauds, and may be established by parol. To establish such a trust nothing more is necessary than to prove that the land was paid for with the cestui que trust’s money.</p> <p>The answer of a defendant to any matter stated in a bill, and responsive to it, is conclusive evidence in his favor unless it is overcome by satisfactory evidence of two opposing witnesses, or of one witness corroborated by other circumstances and facts which give it greater weight than the answer, or which are equivalent in weight to a second witness.</p> <p>In a bill in equity filed to enforce a resulting trust the complainants averred that certain real estate had been bought at sheriff’s sale and paid for with their money, and that, without their knowledge or consent, the title was taken in the name of M., one of the defendants, who had paid no part of the purchase money. The averment that M. paid no part of the purchase money was undenied.. An attorney at law testified that he represented complainants who were creditors of the execution defendant; that lie had bought the land at sheriff’s sale, and paid for it with moneys of the complainants. His testimony was corroborated by cheeks, receipts and the record of the case. He further testified that he caused the deed to be made to M. on the assumption that there was an understanding among the creditors that the title was to be taken in her name and the business conducted by her husband for the benefit of the creditors. Eeld, that the evidence was sufficient to sustain a resulting trust in favor of the complainants.</p>