Rossiter

Rossiter v. Schultz

Good Law
1919 Cal. App. LEXIS 859·43 Cal. App. 716·185 P. 997
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaOctober 22, 1919Civ. No. 3081.California585 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Kerrigan, J.

Plaintiff, as administrator of the estate of Carrie Smith, deceased, brought this action against the defendant, her son, to establish a resulting trust in two lots in Los Angeles standing in defendant's name. Prom the judgment quieting the latter’s title as prayed for in a cross-complaint filed in the action the plaintiff appeals.

The documentary evidence showed that the decedent in her lifetime contracted to purchase the two lots in question. One of them she bought from one Purth under a contract, her interest in which she assigned to the defendant. Upon making the final payment upon this lot she receipted for a deed wherein the defendant was named as grantee and which, after its recordation, was sent by mail to the defendant at his mother’s address.

[1] There is no merit in the contention that such delivery of the deed was insufficient, for it is clear that whatever control the grantor had over the deed was lost when it was mailed by the recorder to the defendant, and title could then vest only in the grantee named in the instrument.

As to the other of said lots, its purchase was contracted for by deceased with one Humbert, the contract providing that upon completion of the…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.