From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Thomas v. Dreyspring

Supreme Court of Alabama
Apr 9, 1936
167 So. 262 (Ala. 1936)

Opinion

3 Div. 171.

April 9, 1936.

Appeal from Circuit Court, Montgomery County; Walter B. Jones, Judge.

J. R. Thomas, of Montgomery, for appellant.

Rushton, Crenshaw Rushton, of Montgomery, for appellee.


Bill to quiet title. The sole question in this case involves the delivery of the trust deed exhibited to the bill of complaint. It is, of course, well settled that if a deed was never delivered to the grantee, it will not operate as a conveyance. Loring v. Grummon, 176 Ala. 236, 57 So. 818; Gulf Red Cedar Co. v. Crenshaw, 169 Ala. 606, 607, 53 So. 812.

The true test of delivery is whether or not the grantor intended to reserve to himself the locus poenitentiæ. Griswold v. Griswold, 148 Ala. 239, 241, 42 So. 554, 121 Am.St.Rep. 64; Powell v. Powell, 217 Ala. 287, 116 So. 139.

The only evidence in this case negatives a delivery actual or constructive of the trust deed in question, and the decree of the circuit court is affirmed.

Affirmed.

GARDNER, BOULDIN, and FOSTER, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Thomas v. Dreyspring

Supreme Court of Alabama
Apr 9, 1936
167 So. 262 (Ala. 1936)
Case details for

Thomas v. Dreyspring

Case Details

Full title:THOMAS v. DREYSPRING

Court:Supreme Court of Alabama

Date published: Apr 9, 1936

Citations

167 So. 262 (Ala. 1936)
167 So. 262

Citing Cases

Watson v. Watson

Adams v. Logan, 260 Ala. 346, 70 So.2d 786. A deed not delivered during the lifetime of the grantor conveys…

Pittman v. Pittman

Delivery involves intent, the test being whether the grantor, or one authoritatively acting for him, intended…