Smith v. Smith

Citations

• 144 Ill. 299
• 33 N.E. 35

Syllabus

<p>1. Advancement — when presumed — how the presumption may be rebutted. Where one purchases land with his own money and the legal title is taken in the name of his wife or child, the law will presume that it was intended as an advancement. This presumption may be rebutted or supported by evidence of antecedent or contemporaneous acts, facts or circumstances connected with the purchase, or so soon thereafter as to be fairly considered a part of the transaction itself.</p> <p>2. Same — presumption rebutted — resulting trust. Where a husband buys land with his own means, if his wife, by fraud or wrongful act against his intention, obtains a conveyance to be made in her name, the presumption of an advancement will be rebutted, and the presumption that she holds in trust will arise.</p> <p>3. Same — and herein of the burden of proof. The presumption of fact, when a deed is made to the purchaser’s wife, that it was intended as a gift or advancement, must prevail until overcome, or rebutted by proof of such facts and circumstances as will satisfy the conscience of the chancellor that the conveyance was, in fact, taken to the wife for the benefit of the husband. The burden of proof is on the party claiming a resultant trust to show that an advancement was not intended.</p>