Wallace v. Reddick

Citations

• 119 Ill. 151
• 8 N.E. 801

Syllabus

<p>1. Advancement—defined. An advancement is a giving by a parent to a child or heir, by way of anticipation, of the whole or a part of what is supposed the donee will be entitled to on the death of the party making it.</p> <p>2. Same—whether a gift to be considered an advancement—intention of donor, how to be shown—before and since the act of 1872. Prior to the act of 1872, whether a gift by a parent to a child was to be deemed an advancement, depended upon the intention of the donor, to be gathered from the attending circumstances.</p> <p>3. If the subsequent verbal declarations of an intestate ancestor are admissible at all to show his intention in making conveyances to his sons was to make advancements, yet if they were made to persons having no interest in the subject matter, and are reproduced long after his death, they will be regarded as a most unsatisfactory class of evidence.</p> <p>4. The proof, merely, of gifts of land by a father to a son, even prior to the act of 1872, is not alone sufficient to show they were intended as advancements.</p> <p>5. And in cases of intestacy since the act- of 1872 went into effect, gifts or grants made by the intestate to any of his children will not be regarded as advancements-unless they'are so expressed in-writing, or charged as such by him, or acknowledged in writing by such children.</p> <p>6. Same—effect of act of 1872 as to prior gifts. The act of 1872, relating to advancements, applies to advancements made prior to its enactment, in cases of subsequent distribution.</p>