Wilson v. Bridgforth

Citations

• 108 Miss. 199
• 66 So. 524

Syllabus

<p>1. Appeal and Error. Review. Absence of ruling below. Deeds. Deposit for delivery after death. Validity. Reservation. Evidence.</p> <p>Where a motion is made in the lower court to exclude testimony, but the record fails to show that it was acted on by that court, the competency of such evidence will not be reviewed by the supreme court on appeal.</p> <p>2. Deeds. Deposit for delivery after death. Validity.</p> <p>On the question whether the deposit of deeds with a depositary, was such as to vest title in the grantees, on delivery to them by the depositary of the deeds after grantor’s death, it is not important what the depositary thought, or what he would have done, if the grantor had demanded return of the deeds, but the important question is, what he had a right to do.</p> <p>3. Same.</p> <p>And the vesting of title in such case, does not depend simply on what the grantor intended to do, or what he thought he had done, but on what he did.</p> <p>4. Same.</p> <p>A grantor need not deliver a deed to the grantee directly in order to vest title. If he does, the delivery must be in his lifetime. He may, however, deliver it to a depositary to be by him delivered to the grantee, and this last delivery will be good, though made, after the grantor’s death, provided always and only if, the depositary accepted in the capacity of agent of the grantee, and not the grantor, so that the grantor could never recall' it. It must be left with the depositary without a reservation by the grantor, express or implied, of the right to retake it or otherwise control its use.</p> <p>5. Deeds. Deposit for delivery after death. Restriction.</p> <p>Reservation by the grantor of the right to retake or otherwise control deeds delivered by him to a depositary, to be by him delivered to the grantee, after the grantor’s death, will not be inferred from the fact that at the same time there was also deposited with the depositary, the grantor’s will.</p>