Allen v. . Allen

184 S.E. 485, 209 N.C. 744, 1936 N.C. LEXIS 339

• Court: Supreme Court of North Carolina
• Decided: March 18, 1936
• Status: Published

Opinion

Stacy, O. J.

It is provided by C. S., 3315, that deeds of gift “shall within two years after the making thereof be proved in due form and registered, or otherwise shall be void.” It is conceded that if the delivery in escrow completed the “making” of said deeds, they were not registered within two years thereafter. The. defendants say delivery was not complete, ¿nd registration by them not possible, until said deeds actually came into their possession. This position prevailed below.

The position of the defendants, however appealing, overlooks the effect of a delivery in escrow and the terms of the statute. 18 C. J., 208. “Where a deed is deposited as an escrow to take effect upon the death of the grantor, the general rule is that the deed is immediately operative as against the grantor.” 21 C. J., 889; Fortune v. Hunt, 149 N. C., 358, 63 S. E., 82; Buchanan v. Clark, 164 N. C., 56, 80 S. E., 424.

The deeds of the defendants being deeds of gift, and admittedly not registered “within two years after the making thereof,” are void under the terms of the statute, C. S., 3315. Booth v. Hairston, 193 N. C., 278, 136 S. E., 879 (on rehearing, 195 N. C., 8, 141 S. E., 480); Reeves v. Miller, ante, 362.

The question of advancements, mentioned on the argument, is not presented by the appeal. Paschal v. Paschal, 197 N. C., 40, 147 S. E., 680; Lunsford v. Yarborough, 189 N. C., 476, 127 S. E., 426; Thompson v. Smith, 160 N. C., 256, 75 S. E., 1010; Nobles v. Davenport, 183 N. C. 207; 1 Am. Jur. 715.

New trial.