Mittel v. Karl

Citations

• 133 Ill. 65
• 8 L.R.A. 655

Syllabus

<p>1. Tenancy by the entirety—effect of Married Woman’s act of 1861. Prior to the adoption of the Married Woman’s act- of 1861, a deed made to a man and his wife did not pass an estate to them as joint tenants, but as tenants by the entirety, and the survivor took the whole estate; but since the Married Woman’s act the right of survivorship has ceased, and the husband and wife will take and hold as tenants in common.</p> <p>2. Conveyance to husband and wife—estate for life, with remainder in fee to survivor. A husband and wife, being the owners of land, in 1875 conveyed the same to a trustee, who by warranty deed reconveyed to the wife and her husband by name, and to “the survivor of them, in her or his own right:” Held, that the husband and wife did not take as tenants in common, but an estate for life, with a contingent remainder in fee to the survivor.</p> <p>3. Joint tenancy—tenancy in common. A joint tenancy, at the common law, is distinguished by unity of possession, unity of interest and- unity of time of the commencement of the title. Tenants in common are such as have a unity of possession, but a distinct and several title to their respective shares.</p> <p>4. Construction oe deeds. In the construction of deeds and other written contracts it is the duty of the court to ascertain the intention of the parties, and that intention must control; but in arriving at the intention, effect must be given to each word, clause or term employed by the parties, rejecting none as meaningless or surplusage.</p> <p>5. A construction which requires the rejection of an entire clause of a deed is not to be admitted except from unavoidable necessity; but the intention of the parties, as manifested by the language employed in the deed, should, as far as possible, be carried into effect.</p>