From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Smith v. Haskins

Supreme Court of Rhode Island. PROVIDENCE
Mar 7, 1900
22 R.I. 6 (R.I. 1900)

Opinion

March 7, 1900.

PRESENT: Matteson, C.J., Stiness and Tillinghast, JJ.

(1) Deeds. Requisites to create Fee Simple. A mortgage deed, dated May 11, 1875, of an estate to "A. trustee, his successors and assigns," conveyed a life estate merely to the mortgagee, and hence a sale of the premises after his decease by his administrator with the will annexed was void.

(2) Trespass and Ejectment. Burden of Proof. In actions of trespass and ejectment the plaintiff must prevail on the strength of his own title and not on the weakness of the defendant's.

TRESPASS AND EJECTMENT. The facts are stated in the opinion. Heard on petition of defendant for a new trial. New trial granted.

James C. Collins and James C. Collins, Jr., for plaintiff.

Franklin P. Owen, for defendant.


The plaintiff claims title to the estate demanded under a mortgagee's deed from Edward K. Glezen, as administrator with the will annexed on the estate of Abraham H. Okie, deceased, dated June 8, 1898. The mortgage under which the sale was made, on which the mortgagee's deed rests, was given, as appears by its date, May 11, 1875, by Albert K. Barnes to Abraham H. Okie, trustee. It runs to the mortgagee, "his successors and assigns," omitting the word "heirs," which, by the common law, is essential to create a fee. At that date the provisions of Gen. Laws R.I. cap. 202, § 21, modifying the common law so that the words "in fee simple" may be used to create a fee as well as the word "heirs," was not in force. Inasmuch as the word "heirs" is omitted from the deed, it must be construed as having conveyed merely a life estate to the mortgagee, and consequently the estate conveyed terminated at his death, and the attempted sale by his administrator years afterwards was void.

It is a fundamental principle in actions of trespass and ejectment that the plaintiff must prevail on the strength of his own title and not on the weakness of the defendant's. The plaintiff having failed to establish his title to the demanded premises, the defendant's petition for a new trial must be granted and the case remitted to the Common Pleas Division with direction to enter judgment for the defendant for costs.


Summaries of

Smith v. Haskins

Supreme Court of Rhode Island. PROVIDENCE
Mar 7, 1900
22 R.I. 6 (R.I. 1900)
Case details for

Smith v. Haskins

Case Details

Full title:CHARLES W. SMITH vs. WILLIAM T. HASKINS

Court:Supreme Court of Rhode Island. PROVIDENCE

Date published: Mar 7, 1900

Citations

22 R.I. 6 (R.I. 1900)
45 A. 741

Citing Cases

Talbot v. Town of Little Compton

The burden of proof is upon her, and all defenses are available to the respondents. If the complainant is to…

Davis v. Girard

It is well settled here that a plaintiff in an ejectment case in order to recover possession of disputed…