Dean v. Parker

Appeal—Review—Finding op Fact—Conclusions of Law__Where there is no exception to a finding of fact, on the ground that it is not supported by the evidence, and no specification wherein the evidence fails to sustain it, the sufficiency of the evidence to justify it cannot be considered on appeal; but if the finding be one of law as distinguished from the finding of ca ultimate fact, it may be reviewed and the error corrected.

Deed—Execution — Signatures—Delivery — Finding. — A finding that a deed was made and executed, but that it was never delivered, will be construed to mean that it was signed, but not in fact delivered.

Husband and Wife — Community Property' — Title of Surviving Husband.— Estate of Deceased Wife.—Land, the title to which is taken in a wife’s name, but which is paid for with community funds is community property, and after the death of the wife belongs to the surviving husband, without administration, and the estate of the wife takes no title or interest in it which can be conveyed to any person.

Id. — Administration of Wife's Estate — Probate Sale.— Estoppel of Husband’s Grantee. — The act of a husband in filing a petition for letters of administration on his deceased wife’s estate, setting forth therein that the land in controversy was his wife’s separate estate, and causing the same to be sold as such by order of tho probate court, does not estop a grantee of the husband, in an action to quiet title against a grantee of the purchaser of the property as the estate of the wife, at the probate sale, from showing that the property was community property, and belonged to the husband.

Id. — Equitable Estoppel—Constituent Elements.—In order to constitute an equitable estoppel from claiming title to land by an admission of the owner that he had no title, it must be shown that the party making the admission, by his declarations or conduct, was apprise'd of the true state of his title; that he made the admission, with the express intention to deceive, or with such carelessness or culpable negligence as to amount to constructive fraud; that the other party was not only destitute of all knowledge of the true state of the title, but of convenient or ready means of acquiring such knowledge; and that he relied directly upon such admission, and will be injured in allowing its truth to be disproved.

Deed — Delivery to Third Person — Evidence — Intention of Grantor —■ Opinion of Witness. — Where the delivery of a deed is disputed, evidence of the party with whom the grantor left it for the benefit of the grantee, as to any declarations made or conversations had by or with the grantor in relation to the delivery at that or any subsequent time, is competent to show the grantor’s intention; but evidence as to what the witness would have done if the deed had been afterwards called for by the grantor is inadmissible.