Rowell v. Freese
This text of 23 Me. 182 (Rowell v. Freese) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Judicial Court of Maine primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
The opinion of the Court was by
This is a bill in equity. The defendant demurs to it, alleging that it contains no such facts as would authorize this Court, as a Court of equity, to take cognizance of it. On looking into the bill we find an allegation, that the defendant received a conveyance of an estate, therein described, in trust; and this Court has cognizance of trusts. But we think, that the bill should have stated something more ; it should appear that the conveyance was made in trust expressly; or by implication ; and, if by implication, such facts should be stated as would clearly show it to be such. It should appear either, that the whole consideration for the conveyance came from the plaintiffs; or that the plaintiffs had an equitable right to have the conveyance made to them ; and that the defendant well knew it; but that he, nevertheless, fraudulently procured it to be made to himself; or some other ground, from which a Court could be authorized to infer an implied, resulting, or constructive trust. The bill does not present any such case ; and therefore must be adjudged insufficient, and be dismissed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
23 Me. 182, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/rowell-v-freese-me-1843.