Saunders v. Greever

Citations

• 85 Va. 252
• 7 S.E. 391
• 1888 Va. LEXIS 34

Syllabus

<p>1. Personal Property&emdash;Possession&emdash;Ownership.&emdash;As men generally own the personal property they possess, so proof of possession is presumptive proof of ownership.</p> <p>2. Parent and Child&emdash;Contracts&emdash;Equity&emdash;Proof.&emdash; Contracts between parent and child are in equity regarded with a jealous eye. Hence, when the bona fides of the transaction is in question, the proof must be clear, cogent and convincing. Poorman v. Kilgore, 26 Penn. St. 365 ; [67 Am. Dec. 425.]</p> <p>3. Idem&emdash;Listing personalty for taxation&emdash;Case at bar.&emdash;Father owned and occupied farm, and possessed valuable utensils, stock, furniture, etc. Son lived with him as manager. For nine years before father's death, personalty was listed in son’s name, and after father’s death son claimed it as his under parol purchase. Evidence to establish purchase was deficient, and showed that personalty was so listed to avoid execution-levy for surety debts, and that father claimed and exercised ownership over it up to his death. In suit between son and his co-distributees:</p> <p>Held :</p> <p>The presumption of ownership in son, arising from listing the personalty in his name, was overcome by other evidence, and the property is a part of ancestor’s estate for equal distribution.</p> <p>4. Witnesses&emdash;Competency.&emdash;When one distributee claims as his own personalty in possession of ancestor at his death, under parol purchase by distributee from ancestor, said distributee is not, in a suit with his codistributees, competent to testify to said purchase, unless his case comes within some one of the conditions contained in Code 1873, ch. 177, 21 and 22, as amended by Acts 1876-’7, ch. 256, p. 265.</p>