Kimball v. Tripp

California Supreme Court Jun 23, 1902 No. S.F. No. 2397.Published

Before: Smith

AI Brief

AI-generated · verify before citing

Holding. The court held that where property is conveyed to an agent in trust, equity will impose a constructive trust to prevent the agent from converting the property to their own use, regardless of whether the trust was expressed in writing.

Issues

Whether conveyances of land made to an agent in trust are enforceable in equity despite the lack of a written trust instrument.
Whether a prior suit by an administrator for personal property estops heirs from bringing a subsequent equity suit to enforce a constructive trust on remaining property.
Whether a tenant in common may maintain an action to set aside conveyances of land.

Disposition. affirmed

Quotations verified verbatim against the opinion

“The deeds, it is found, were made to,the defendant simply as her agent, and were therefore taken by him in trust for her; and though the trust was not expressed in writing, equity will not permit the defendant to convert the property to his own use”

“Fraud in their use is as much a ground for the interposition of equity as fraud in their creation.”

“The plaintiff, as one of several tenants in common, was entitled to maintain the action.”

Synopsis

The facts are stated in the opinion.

SMITH, C.

The plaintiff is one of the heirs of Elizabeth L. Cook, deceased, and brings this suit, on behalf of herself and co-heirs, to set aside certain conveyances of lands and

[633]

releases of interests therein, and certain assignments of mortgages made to the defendant by the deceased. The plaintiff had judgment, from which and from an order denying his motion for new trial the defendant appeals.

The case involves the same general transaction as was involved in the case of

Knight

Tripp,

121 Cal. 674, to which reference may be made for a fuller statement of the circumstances of the ease than we deem it necessary to give here. The material facts of the case are presented by the following allegations of the complaint, which are found by the court to be true:—

The deceased in her lifetime was the owner of the real property and ehoses in action described in the complaint, and also of the other personal property, consisting of deposits in bank and other items of the value of $10,802.13, which was recovered by the administrator in the former suit. The conveyances and assignments in question were made on the thirty-first day of May, 1895; and it is alleged and found with regard to them that on the day named the deceased “was in great fear and peril of death, and . . . believed she was so, and so believing, and so in fear of death, then and there did appoint and constitute W. G-. Tripp, the defendant, her agent, and did then and there purport to convey, and attempt to convey and transfer to him, as such agent, all of her said property, real and personal, and did then and there contemporaneously with such purported and attempted conveyance and transfer orally instruct said Tripp [the defendant], in the event of her death occurring, to make the following disposition of her said property, to wit: [Here follow instructions, being substantially as set out in the report of the former case, 121 Cal. 677], and that all property remaining after said instructions were carried out said Tripp was further instructed to retain for himself. That then and there said [deceased] did transfer and deliver to said . . . Tripp certain of said property, and attempted to transfer, convey, and deliver the whole thereof to him as gifts

Kimball v. Tripp

AI Brief

Synopsis

SMITH, C.

More from California Supreme Court

Related research

AI Brief