Walker v. Walker

Citations

• 42 Ill. 311

Syllabus

<p>1. Delivery of a deed—need not he formal. Where the grantor in a deed induces the grantee to believe that a deed had been executed which made him the owner of certain premises, and afterward permits such grantee to act under this belief in the construction of valuable improvements on the land, he cannot then be allowed to say that the deed was in fact inoperative for want of a formal delivery.</p> <p>2. No formal delivery to the grantee in person is necessary. If the grantor in a deed intends, when executing it, to be understood as delivering it, that is sufficient. The intention of the party is the controlling element.</p> <p>3. Hence, where a father voluntarily made a deed to his son and did not deliver it, but their subsequent conduct was such as to show that both of them considered the deed as having been effectually executed for the purpose of passing title, no delivery was necessary. Less strictness is required in cases of voluntary settlements than in other conveyances, because the parties are supposed to place great confidence in each other.</p>