Rockafellow v. Newcomb

Citations

• 57 Ill. 186

Syllabus

<p>1. Evidexce—<o prow marriage contract — express promise need not be shown. To prove a contract of marriage an express promise need not be shown. A mutual engagement may be inferred from constant and devoted attentions gladly welcomed, from reciprocal affection, and the interchange of letters expressive of earnest love.</p> <p>2. Same—admissions. Admissions of a party are never conclusive against him; and when made for the purpose of effecting a compromise of the matter in dispute, should be excluded as evidence, on the ground of public policy.</p> <p>3. Chanceky—jurisdiction of to decree a reconveyance of land given in consideration of marriage. Where land is conveyed in consideration of a marriage contract, and the grantee refuses to consummate the marriage, equity will decree a reconveyance. Marriage is a valid consideration for a deed.</p> <p>4. Conveyance—undue influence used in obtaining, will amoid the deed. Undue influence exercised by the grantee over the grantor to obtain a conveyance of real estate, resulting in a benefit to the former and a great disadvantage to the latter, will avoid the deed. As, where it was sought to obtain a reconveyance of land on the ground, as alleged by the complainant, that lie executed the deed in consideration of a promise on the part of the defendant to marry him, which the latter refused to fulfill, it was held, that although tlie contract of marriage may not have formed the consideration for the deed, yet the proof showing that the grantee exercised an undue influence over the grantor in obtaining the deed, to the great benefit of the former and the great disadvantage of tlie latter, by reason of the close and tender intimacy between the parlies, visits having been interchanged and loving letters passed between them, and the woman threatening to annul tlie marriage contract unless the trade was consummated, afforded sufficient grounds upon which to decree a reconveyance.</p>