Seculovich v. Morton

Citations

• 101 Cal. 673
• 36 P. 387
• 1894 Cal. LEXIS 1098

Syllabus

<p>Trust—Laches—Bar of Action.-—Where plaintiff purchased and caused to be conveyed to the infant son of the defendant a certain lot of land upon a parol agreement, that if the child should die unmarried and without issue, before he arrived at age, the defendant, after distribution of the property to him as heir, would, on demand of plaintiff, immediately convey the same to plaintiff, and the child died when a little over five years of age, but no demand was made by plaintiff for a conveyance for about twenty-four years after the death of the child, an action brought one year after such demand, to enforce the trust, is barred by the laches of the plaintiff.</p> <p>Id.—Absence of Defendant From State.—The fact that the complaint • alleged that within six months after the death of the infant defendant left the state and has ever since resided in the state of Maryland, where demand was made upon him for a conveyance, does not relieve the bar of the cause of action, by the laches of the plaintiff in failing to make a demand for a conveyance within a reasonable time.</p> <p>Id.—Remedy of Plaintiff—Service by Publication—Appointment of Commissioner.—Notwithstanding the defendant’s absence from the state the plaintiff had a remedy to invoke the authority of the court, and, upon service of protest in the manner prescribed by the statute, could have procured the appointment of the commissioner to convey the property to him.</p> <p>Id.—Express Trust—Statute of Limitations—-Great Laches.—Although as a general rule the statute of limitations does not rule against an express trust where there is concealed fraud, yet when the injured party has been guilty of great laches in the prosecution of his remedy he will be barred in equity, on account of the paramount importance of having titles settled.</p>