Hawes v Wyatt
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 21 July 1790 |
| Date | 21 July 1790 |
| Court | High Court of Chancery |
English Reports Citation: 30 E.R. 122
IN LINCOLN'S INN HALL
See Simpson v. Walker, 1831, 5 Sim. 7.
[263] hawes versus wyatt. In Lincoln's Inn Hall, July 21, 1790. [See Simpson v. Walker, 1831, 5 Sim. 7.] For the case-and arguments, vide 3 Brown Cha. Rep. 156.-A deed, though obtained bytfraud, is nevertheless a revocation of a prior will. But this decree was afterwards reversed. Master of the Rolls. (After stating the case.) This being the situation of the parties, let us see what was the evidence on which the relief was prayed. The case made on the first hearing of this cause was this. The father and the son were both in indigent circumstances; the father was the beadle of a parish, and the profit of that place was the principal part of his income; what property he had was deeply incumbered. The son was in a very deplorable state; he lived with several persons as a servant, and at last was obliged to go abroad as the servant of an inferior officer of an East Indiaman. The transaction now complained of took place between parties in the situation I have now described. The plaintiffs say no money whatever was due from the son to the father, but that the father wanted to prevail on the son to cut off the entail of the estate, and said that if the son would not do it, he would have nothing more to do with him. The father then went to his own attorney, and he and his attorney agreed to insert 1000 as a nominal consideration for this conveyance, and then the son executed this under the circumstances I have before mentioned. On the first argument, therefore, it was insisted that the parental authority had been improperly exercised in this case, not having been exercised for the purpose of procuring any family settlement of the estate, but for the mere purpose of giving the estate to the father. I offered the defendants an issue as to the consideration of this conveyance; but this they declined on the ground of their having no evidence of the debt (though it seems that from the deed itself an inference would arise that the consideration [264] inserted therein was true, and that it would lie on the plaintiffs to shew the contrary, more especially after both parties were dead; however the defendants would not take an issue on this. It was then argued on the part of the defendants, that whether the son in his lifetime could have had relief against this transaction or not, yet he having acquiesced in it, no person claiming under him can now complain of what he made no...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Walker v Armstrong
...654, reversed on appeal, 24 L. J. (Ch.) 609); Attorney-General v. rigor (8 Ves. 256); Hawes v. Wijalt (3 Bro. C. C. 156, reversing S. C. 2 Cox, 263). There is another point which may be briefly mentioned, namely, whether the statute 1 Viet. c. 26 does not prevent what has been done from ope......
-
Ford v Davesies De Pontes Davesies De Pontes v Kendall
...there is a revocation ; Hick v. Motrs (Ambler, 215, but better reported in 3 Lord Kenyon, 117); Beard v. Beard (3 Atk. 72); Hawesv. Wyatt (2 Cox, 263; 3 Bro. C. C. 156); Shorn v. J'incke (5 T. R. 124); Ex parie Earl of Ilcheater (7 Ves. 373); [584] Hannood v. Oglander (6 Ves. 199). The latt......
-
Simpson v Walker
...plea. The Plaintiff's position is that the deeds of May 1830 are not only void, but operate as a revocation of the will. In Hawes v. Wyatt (2 Cox, 263) Lord Alvanley decided that a deed which was void on equitable grounds only was a revocation of a will: but Lord Thurlow reversed that decre......
-
Hawes against Wyatt
...29 E.R. 463 LINCOLN'S INN HALL.Hawes against Wyatt See Hoghton v. Hoghton, 1852, 15 Beav. 300. Vide S. C. on the hearing at the Rolls, 2 Cox, 263. hawes against wyatt. Lincoln's Inn Hall, 2ls July [1790]. [See Hoghton v. Hoghton, 1852, 15 Beav. 300.] [Vide S. C. on the hearing at the Bolls,......