Romary v. Romary
Citations
- 91 Kan. 240
- 137 P. 982
- 1914 Kan. LEXIS 9
Syllabus
<p>SYLLABUS BY THE COURT.</p> <p>Family Settlement — Advancements — Oral Agreement by Youngest Son ' for Maintenance of Parents — Partial Execution of Agreement — Death of Parents — Equitable Rights of Youngest Son. The owner of land gave the possession of an eighty-acre tract and a team - to each of his children as . they respectively attained to majority, with the understanding and agreement, participated in by their mother, that they should have the title at the father’s death. It was also a part of the parents’ plan that the youngest son should remain on the homestead of 120 aeres and háve the title to it when they died. The older children occupied and improved ■their respective tracts. The. youngest son was still a minor when his father died. A family settlement was then agreed upon to carry out the original plan. The rights of majority were conferred on the minor that he might enter into the agreement. The sons and daughters conveyed all ¡their interests in all the land to their mother-. She conveyed to each of the older ones the tract occupied by him or her respectively, and made a will, which she promised not t.o change, devising the homestead to ¡the youngest son at her death upon his agreement to care for her on the farm while she lived. The agreement was verbal but was faithfully carried out until the youngest son married, when unhappy differences arose causing strife and ill feeling between the mother and the son’s wife, and also between the mother and son, in which harsh and reproachful language was used by all three, culminating in the withdrawal of the mother from the homestead. In a suit by the mother against the son to set aside the contract, which was verbal, and to quiet her title to the home, based upon his alleged default, and the charge that because of the unkindness of the son and his wife she could no longer live with him, the district court found generally for the mother. Judgment was entered quieting her title to the homestead and for the r
How courts have described this case
Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.
- concluding that laches did not apply because, among other reasons, the defendant had “faithfully promised [the plaintiff] to transfer the Dime Bank stock to him from time to time”
Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).
Judges: Benson
Read full opinion on CourtListenerSourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.