Cunningham v. Davis

62 Miss. 366
CourtMississippi Supreme Court
DecidedOctober 15, 1884
StatusPublished
Cited by15 cases

This text of 62 Miss. 366 (Cunningham v. Davis) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Mississippi Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Cunningham v. Davis, 62 Miss. 366 (Mich. 1884).

Opinion

Campbell, C. J.,

delivered the opinion of the court.

In form the instrument is a deed. It was so called by the maker. It was acknowledged as such by him before a justice of the peace. Its character must be determined from its several provisions. If by it any present interest was vested it should be held to be a deed. If it was not to have any operation or effect until the death of the maker it could not be treated as a deed, although it was so named, and is in form a deed. The provision in these words, “ And that this deed do not take effect until after my death/’ coupled with the direction that the object of the bounty of the maker of the instrument should pay all his debts and have only the remainder of his property, convinces us that the paper was testamentary in its character.

Affirmed.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Buchanan v. Buchanan
112 So. 2d 224 (Mississippi Supreme Court, 1959)
Hall v. Clements
58 So. 2d 925 (Mississippi Supreme Court, 1952)
Peebles v. Rodgers
50 So. 2d 632 (Mississippi Supreme Court, 1951)
Gaston v. Mitchell
4 So. 2d 892 (Mississippi Supreme Court, 1941)
Tapley v. McManus
168 So. 51 (Mississippi Supreme Court, 1936)
Ferrara v. Russo
102 A. 86 (Supreme Court of Rhode Island, 1917)
Cox v. Reed
74 So. 330 (Mississippi Supreme Court, 1917)
Simpson v. McGee
73 So. 55 (Mississippi Supreme Court, 1916)
Goodale v. Evans
172 S.W. 370 (Supreme Court of Missouri, 1914)
Sappingfield v. King
89 P. 142 (Oregon Supreme Court, 1907)
Moss Point Lumber Co. v. Harrison County
42 So. 290 (Mississippi Supreme Court, 1906)
McGarrigle v. Roman Catholic Orphan Asylum
79 P. 447 (California Supreme Court, 1905)
Murphy v. Gabbert
66 S.W. 536 (Supreme Court of Missouri, 1902)
Estate of Williams
5 Coffey 1 (California Superior Court, San Francisco County, 1895)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
62 Miss. 366, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/cunningham-v-davis-miss-1884.