Angel

The plaintiff is the mother of the defendant. In the year 1925, and prior thereto, plaintiff was the owner of the property described in the complaint and was living thereon with the defendant and the defendant’s husband. In the year 1925 the plaintiff signed and acknowledged a grant deed of said property to the defendant and placed the same in the plaintiff’s safe deposit box, intending that it should be delivered to the defendant at plaintiff’s death. This deed, hereafter referred to herein as the first deed, was never delivered, but remained in plaintiff’s possession at the time of trial of this action. The foregoing facts are admitted, except that appellant now suggests that there is no evidence that plaintiff had title tó the property and that therefore plaintiff is not in a position to demand a decree quieting title. We think, however, that the ease was tried upon the theory, accepted by both parties at the trial, that plaintiff was the owner of the property unless she had conveyed it to the defendant. Incidentally there is abundant evidence that the plaintiff does have the title unless the defendant is entitled to prevail by virtue of the deed of conveyance to her. The chief…