Thomas v. Dreyspring

Supreme Court of Alabama

Thomas v. Dreyspring

167 So. 262, 232 Ala. 99, 1936 Ala. LEXIS 144

CourtSupreme Court of Alabama

DecidedApril 9, 1936

Docket3 Div. 171.

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 167 So. 262 (Thomas v. Dreyspring) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Alabama primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Thomas v. Dreyspring, 167 So. 262, 232 Ala. 99, 1936 Ala. LEXIS 144 (Ala. 1936).

Pincite

Opinion

ANDERSON, Chief Justice.

Bill to quiet title. The sole question in this case involves the delivery of the trust deed exhibited to the bill of complaint. It is, of course, well settled that if a deed was never delivered to the grantee, it will not operate as a conveyance. Loring v. Grummon, 176 Ala. 236, 57 So. 818; Gulf Red Cedar Co. v. Crenshaw, 169 Ala. 606, 607, 53 So. 812.

The true test of delivery is whether or not the grantor intended to reserve to himself the locus poenitentise. Griswold v. Griswold, 148 Ala. 239, 241, 42 So. 554, *100 121 Am.St.Rep. 64; Powell v. Powell, 217 Ala. 287, 116 So. 139.

The only evidence in this case negatives a delivery actual or constructive of the trust deed in question, and the decree of the circuit court is affirmed.

Affirmed.

GARDNER, BOULDIN, and FOSTER, JJ., concur.

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