Kent v. Stevenson

Citations

• 127 Miss. 529
• 90 So. 241

Syllabus

<p>1. Deeds. A “condition subsequenf’ renders a vested estate liable to 'be defeated and must be strictlv construed.</p> <p>A “condition subsequent” in a deed is a condition which' operates upon an estate already vested,' and renders it liable to be defeated; the estate conveyed remains defeasible until the condition is performed or destroyed or barred by limitation or estoppel; and such a condition in the deed is not favored in law, and is construed strictly because it tends to cut down or defeat the estate.</p> <p>3. Deeds. Provision for grantees’ transfer on failure to erect gin held not a condition subsequent, but a covenant.</p> <p>In a deed conveying land in consideration of a cash payment, and not for balance deferred payment, containing a covenant reciting, “for the further consideration that the grantees or their assigns will erect on the premises hereinafter described a cotton gin not later than the 1st day of January, 1931; and on the failure so to do will resell the same property to the grantor herein for the cash paid to the grantor to 'that date, and the further agreement that the grantees will execute at the same time a quitclaim deed to said property to the grantor,” such covenant is not a condition subsequeht.</p> <p>3. Deeds. Covenant held to be for grantor’s benefit, so that grantee would not be permitted to make default and to tender back the land and to receive payments.</p> <p>Such a covenant is for the benefit of the grantor, and not for the benefit of the grantee; and the grantee will not be .permitted to make default in the performance of such covenant by failure to erect the cotton gin provided for, and by virtue of such default on his part be entitled to reconvey the land to the vendor, and receive back the purchase money paid the vendor therefor.</p>