Tyler v. Daniel
Citations
- 65 Ill. 316
Syllabus
<p>1. Resulting- trust—sufficiency of bill for. The heirs at- law of a deceased person exhibited their bill in equity, against the widow and others, to establish and enforce a resulting trust in their favor in respect to certain land, showing that, after the payment of all claims against the estate, there was left in the hands of the widow the sum of over §500, there being no administration had, and that a part of this sum was invested in the lands sought to be recovered. The bill also charged that the knowledge of their interest in the land came to complainants within the year preceding the filing of the bill. The court below dismissed the bill on demurrer on two causes: first, that it showed no equitable grounds of relief; and secondly, on the ground of laches in the complainants: Reid, that the court erred in dismissing the bill, as it showed a case prima facie entitling the complainants to the relief sought, and that the delay in bringing suit was not unreasonable.</p> <p>3. Where no administration was had of an estate, and the widow received §500 after paying all claims, and invested a portion of that sum in 'lands, on demurrer to a bill by the heirs of the deceased to declare and enforce a resulting trust in their favor as to the lands, it was contended that, as widow, she was entitled to the sum named, for her specific allowance under the statute: Reid, that if the widow was so entitled, it was a matter of defense, to be shown by answer to the bill, as the amount thus due her could be made to appear only from evidence.</p> <p>3. In the same case it was urged, on appeal, that as the widow maintained the children of the deceased, the sum expended by her for each child would more than equal the amount charged as coming to her hands from the estate: Reid., that as it was alleged that the investment was made soon after the death of the husband, when there could be but little due for the maintenance of the children, then if the land was bought with funds belonging
Judges: Scott
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.