Long v. Timms

107 Mo. 512
CourtSupreme Court of Missouri
DecidedOctober 15, 1891
StatusPublished
Cited by23 cases

This text of 107 Mo. 512 (Long v. Timms) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Missouri primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Long v. Timms, 107 Mo. 512 (Mo. 1891).

Opinion

Brace, J.

This is an action in ejectment in which the plaintiff seeks to recover an undivided fourth part [515]*515of certain real estate described in the petition. There is no dispute about the facts, the case was tried by the court without a jury, and the plaintiff obtained judgment for the undivided eighth part of the premises; and the defendant appeals.

Valentine S. Peyton is the common source of title. In the year 1836, he was seized in fee simple of a tract of land in Clay county, containing two hundred and seventy ácres, on which he. with his wife, was then residing. He then had living one married daughter, Mrs. Frances Elizabeth Long, wife of Garrard Long, and two grandchildren, Louisa Frances Collier and Valentine Smallwood Peyton Collier, minors of tender years, children of his deceased daughter, Nancy. Mrs. Long and her children and these grandchildren were his only lineal descendants.

On the fourth of October, 1836, the said Peyton by deed duly executed, in which his wife joined, conveyed to his said daughter, Frances Elizabeth Long, the fee simple to the south half of his said land, reserving, however, the use of the house, improvements and improved land, except five acres, to his wife during her natural life.

On the fifth of December, 1836, the said Peyton and his wife duly executed the following deed: “This indenture made and entered into this fifth day of December, in the year of our Lord eighteen hundred and thirty-six, between Valentine S. Peyton, of the county of Clay, and state of Missouri, of the one part, and Woodson J. Moss, of the county and state aforesaid, of the other part, witnesseth: ■ That, whereas the said Valentine S. Peyton having realized from the sale of a tract of land, the property of his wife, Elizabeth Peyton, the sum of $3,762.79 is desirous and willing to secure to her some equivalent for the same. Now, therefore, in consideration of the premises aforesaid, and with the view of providing for the support and maintenance of his said wife, and in consideration of the [516]*516natural love and affection which, he, the said Valentine S. Peyton, has for his grandchildren, Valentine Small-wood Peyton Collier and Louisa Frances Collier, being the children of his daughter, Nancy McClanahan Collier, formerly Nancy McClanahan Peyton, of Nicholas county, Kentucky, the said Valentine S. Peyton has granted, bargained, sold and set over, and by these presents doth grant, bargain, sell and set over unto the said Woodson J. Moss all that certain piece or parcel of land situate, lying and being in the county of Clay, and state of Missouri, aforesaid, to-wit, the north half of the tract, whereon we now live, to begin at the northwest corner of said tract, thence south on the west line thereof so far as by running a dividing line due east to the east line, thence with that line north to the northeast corner of said tract, and thence west to the beginning to contain one hundred and thirty-five acres; and also three certain slaves for life, to-wit, Henry, Jinny and Sarah, to have and to hold, receive and take the same to him, the said Woodson J. Moss, his heirs and assigns to the only proper use and behoof of him, the said Woodson J. Moss, his heirs and assigns forever. In trust, however, and to the intent and purpose that he, the said Woodson J.'Moss, shall, and will, employ and appropriate, or cause to be employed and appropriated for the use and benefit of the said Elizabeth Peyton during her natural life, all the rents and profits of the said lands and negroes, allowing the said Elizabeth Peyton the personal occupation of the said land and the possession and use of the said negroes whensoever and as long as she may choose. And the said Woodson J. Moss is hereby authorized to sell at such time, and on such terms as he may think best, all or any of said negroes, and to put the money arising from such sale or' sales to interest, or pay over the same with the interest which may have accrued thereon, or the interest only, at his discretion, to the'said Elizabeth Peyton without security for its return in any event; and this [517]*517conveyance is upon this further condition, to-wit: That at the death of the said Elizabeth Peyton said conveyance to the said Woodson J. Moss, his heirs and assigns shall be null and void, and the trust aforesaid shall cease, and the said land and one-half of the said negroes and their increase, remaining unsold, and one-half of the money unexpended, arising from the sale of such negroes as may have been sold, to revert and be the absolute property of the said Valentine Smallwood Peyton Collier and Louisa Frances Collier, said infant children of the said Nancy McClanahan Collier, and the other half of said negroes and their increase so remaining unsold, and the one-half of the money unexpended arising as aforesaid to revert to and become the absolute property of my daughter, Frances Elizabeth Long, and her heirs and assigns, and in case of the death of the said Valentine Smallwood Peyton Collier and Louisa Frances Collier, infant children of the said Nancy McClanahan Collier, without issue, then the said land above described and negroes and their proceeds, if sold, to revert to and be the absolute property of my said daughter, Frances Elizabeth Long, her heirs and assigns forever, and in case of the death of the said Frances Elizabeth Long, without issue, then the whole of the above-described negroes and their proceeds, if sold, to revert and be the absolute property of the said Valentine Smallwood Peyton Collier and Louisa Frances Collier forever.”

The land in controversy, forty-five acres, is included within the boundaries described in this deed. Louisa Frances Collier died a minor without issue in 1838; Mrs. Elizabeth Peyton died in 1862. Prior to August 28, 1852, Valentine S. P. Collier, who is. still living, had married, and then had, and now has, living issue of his marriage. On that day by deed duly executed, he conveyed the premises in controversy to the said Garrard Long who entered into possession thereof, and the interest and possession thereby by him acquired was after-wards by mesne conveyances acquired by the defendant, [518]*518Joseph H. Timms, who was in possession when this suit was brought. Garrard Long died in 1877. Prances Elizabeth Long died March 14, 1886, intestate, leaving surviving her four daughters, one of whom, Lizzie M. Long, is the plaintiff in this case.

I. It is contended for plaintiff that as Valentine S. P. Collier and Louisa Prances Collier were small children, without heirs of their bodies, at the time the deed of December 5, 1886, was executed; whatever estate was intended for them by this deed was in abeyance until their grandmother, Elizabeth Peyton, died, and Louisa having died without an inheritable estate in the lands, in infancy, without issue, long before the death of her grandmother; and no cross-remainder being created in express terms in the deed between her and her brother ; upon the death of the said Elizabeth, the fee to the one undivided half of the land immediately vested in Francis Elizabeth Long, and that plaintiff being one of her four daughters, her only heirs-at-law, is therefore entitled to an undivided eighth of the premises — and the trial court so held.

It is obvious from the terms of the deed, that it was the intention of the grantor that the fee to the land should not vest in remainder until the death of his wife. To accomplish this purpose, it was conveyed in trust to another until that event should happen.

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

Related

Laiben v. Department of Revenue
572 S.W.2d 173 (Supreme Court of Missouri, 1978)
Holland v. Holland
509 S.W.2d 91 (Supreme Court of Missouri, 1974)
Monroe v. Lyons
98 S.W.2d 544 (Supreme Court of Missouri, 1936)
Herren v. Herren
1931 OK 468 (Supreme Court of Oklahoma, 1931)
Hearin v. Standard Life Ins. Co.
8 F.2d 202 (E.D. Arkansas, 1925)
Goodale v. Evans
172 S.W. 370 (Supreme Court of Missouri, 1914)
Johnson v. Calvert
169 S.W. 78 (Supreme Court of Missouri, 1914)
Bernero v. McFarland Real Estate Co.
114 S.W. 531 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 1908)
Tisdale v. Prather
109 S.W. 41 (Supreme Court of Missouri, 1908)
Aldridge v. Aldridge
101 S.W. 42 (Supreme Court of Missouri, 1907)
Underwood v. Cave
75 S.W. 451 (Supreme Court of Missouri, 1903)
Tindall v. Tindall
66 S.W. 1092 (Supreme Court of Missouri, 1902)
Mutual Life Ins. v. Kelly
114 F. 268 (Eighth Circuit, 1902)
Hannibal & St. Joseph Railroad v. Frowein
63 S.W. 500 (Supreme Court of Missouri, 1901)
Turney v. Sparks
88 Mo. App. 363 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 1901)
Hurst v. Von De Veld
58 S.W. 1056 (Supreme Court of Missouri, 1900)
Walton v. Drumtra
54 S.W. 233 (Supreme Court of Missouri, 1899)
Cross v. Hoch
50 S.W. 786 (Supreme Court of Missouri, 1899)
McMillan v. Farrow
41 S.W. 890 (Supreme Court of Missouri, 1897)
Drake v. Crane
27 L.R.A. 653 (Supreme Court of Missouri, 1895)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
107 Mo. 512, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/long-v-timms-mo-1891.