Heneke v. Floring

Citations

• 114 Ill. 554

Syllabus

<p>1. Resulting teust—evidence after great lapse of time. The evidence to establish a resulting trust after the lapse of fifteen or sixteen years, and especially after many of the principal witnesses having knowledge of the facts are dead, should be of the most satisfactory kind. If the evidence fails to satisfy the court that the money paid for the land was that of the party-seeking to establish the trust, no resulting trust can be declared.</p> <p>2. Where a resulting trust is sought to be established after the lapse of many years, on the ground that complainant’s money was used in paying for the same, and that complainant’s wife, by conspiracy and fraud, had the conveyance made to her imbecile son by a former marriage, it is incumbent on the plaintiff to establish these facts by very clear and satisfactory evidence, and failing to do so, he can have no relief.</p>