Plant v. Langdon

235 N.W. 238, 253 Mich. 513, 1931 Mich. LEXIS 828
CourtMichigan Supreme Court
DecidedFebruary 27, 1931
DocketDocket No. 63, Calendar No. 35,207.
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 235 N.W. 238 (Plant v. Langdon) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Michigan Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Plant v. Langdon, 235 N.W. 238, 253 Mich. 513, 1931 Mich. LEXIS 828 (Mich. 1931).

Opinion

Fead, J.

This is a bill to set aside a transfer of real estate by Emma Langdon to herself and her husband, defendant Frank A. Langdon, by the entireties. Mrs. Langdon was 67 years old. Langdon was her fifth husband. Plaintiffs are her children.

For some time during 1927 and the spring of 1928, Mrs. Langdon had been ailing, with a high blood pressure. On March 14,1928, she had a stroke which left her in an almost helpless physical condition. She gradually improved, however, and, during the *514 summer, was able to get about. In September she had a second stroke and died.

The deeds were executed April 24, 1928. On April 23d, she sent for her banker, voluntarily told him she wanted her husband to have the right to draw upon her account and executed an instrument to that effect. On April 24th, she sent for her attorney, discussed with him the disposition of her personal property in case she died intestate, was satisfied with the distribution provided by law, and instructed him to prepare papers to provide a transfer of real estate so that the title would devolve finally on the survivor of herself and husband. These instructions were given in the absence of the husband.

Testimony, conflicting and in detail, was given of Mrs. Langdon’s physical and mental condition. It is not necessary to set it up. Mrs. Langdon’s mental competency at the time of the execution of the deed was shown by the testimony of the scrivener, his wife, the attending physician, the banker, and other disinterested witnesses. The testimony is convincing.

Decree sustaining the deed is affirmed, with costs.

Butzel, C. J., and Wiest, Clark, McDonald, Potter, Sharpe, and North, JJ., concurred.

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

Related

Layton v. Cregan & Mallory Co.
252 N.W. 337 (Michigan Supreme Court, 1933)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
235 N.W. 238, 253 Mich. 513, 1931 Mich. LEXIS 828, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/plant-v-langdon-mich-1931.