Stapleton v Stapleton
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 11 June 1844 |
| Date | 11 June 1844 |
| Court | High Court of Chancery |
English Reports Citation: 60 E.R. 328
HIGH COURT OF CHANCERY
Trust. Gift when Complete.
[186] stapleton v. stapleton. June 11, 1844. Trust. Gift when Complete. A partner in a bank opened an account in one of the books of the firm, which was headed as follows :-" Dr. Mrs. L. S. (the name of his wife), for the education of Bryan, Lavinia Herman and Robert S. (the names of his infant children). Cr. :" and he caused an accountable receipt to be signed by his co-partner on behalf of the firm, purporting to be for 800 received from his wife for the education of his children, and that sum to be placed to the credit of the account so opened, and his private account with the bank was debited with it. Held, that the transaction was a complete and irrevocable declaration of trust in favour of the children. Thomas Stapleton, Esq., deceased, the late husband of the Defendant Henrietta Lavinia Stapleton, and father of the Plaintiffs, Bryan John, Herman and Eobert, and of the Defendant Lavinia Mary Stapleton (all of whom were infants), was a partner with his son, the Defendant Gilbert Stapleton, in a bank at Richmond in Yorkshire. It was the practice of the bank to receive deposits of money to enter them in their accountable receipt-book, and to pay interest upon them. On the 26th of January 1836 Thomas Stapleton caused an account to be opened in that book which was headed as follows :- " Dr. Mrs. Henrietta Lavinia Stapleton, for the education of Bryan John, Lavinia Mary, Herman and Robert Stapleton. Cr.: " and on the same day 800 was carried to the credit side of that account; and Thomas Stapleton's private account with the bauk was debited with that sum, and he caused the following accountable receipt for it to be drawn and signed by Gilbert Stapleton on behalf of the firm:- " Richmond Bank, January 26th, 1836.-Received of Mrs. Henrietta Lavinia Stapleton 4800, for the educa-[187]-tion of Bryan John, Lavinia Mary, Herman and 14 Bin. 188. STAPLETON V. STAPLETON 329 Robert Stapleton; for which I am accountable to her on demand. Not to bear interest." On the-19th February, the 2d August, the 17th August and the 8th November in the same year, Thomas Stapleton's private account was debited with four other sums of 800, and on each of those days a like sum was carried to the credit of the account opened in the accountable receipt-book; and Thomas Stapleton caused accountable receipts for the four sums to be drawn in the same words and signed in the same manner as the first receipt, except that the three last-dated receipts did not contain the words "Not to bear interest." On the 14th February 1837 he caused the five receipts to be cancelled by William Priestman, a clerk of the firm, and an accountable receipt for 1333, 6s. 8d. to be drawn in favour of each of the Plaintiffs. The receipt in favour of Bryan John was as follows, and the other two were in the same form :- "Bichmond Bank, 14th of February 1837.-Received of Master Bryan John Stapleton 1333, 6s. 8d., for which I am accountable, for education. For Thomas Stapleton & Co., Thomas Stapleton. Not to bear interest until the death of Thomas Stapleton, Esq.," and he signed memorandums indorsed on each of those receipts. The memorandum on the receipt in favour of Bryan John was as follows, and the others were in the same form :- " I hereby appoint Eobert Canning, Esq., and my son, Gilbert Stapleton, trustees and guardians for the within-[188]-named Bryan John Stapleton during his minority, to have the management of the money herein named and given by me to said Bryan John Stapleton this 14th day of February 1837. Thomas Stapleton. Witness, W. Priestman." On the same...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Talbot v Cody
...2 M. & K. 262. Low v. CarterENR 1 Beav. 526. Vance v. VanceENR 1 Beav. 605. Gosling v. GoslingENR 3 Drew. 335. Staoketon v. StapletonENR 14 Sim. 186. Howard v. OakesENR 3 Exch. 143. Lucas v. LucasENR 1 Atk. 270. Vandenberg v. PalmerENR 4 K. & J. 204. Mews v. MewsENR 15 Beav. 529. Grant v. G......
-
Bentley v Mackay
...v. Law (15 L. J. (N. S.) ch. 187); Gaskell v. Gaskell (2 Younge & Jer. 502); fHieatley v. Purr (1 Keen, 551); Stapleton v. Stapleton (14 Sim. 186); Hughes v. Stubbs (1 Hare, 476); Smith v. Warde (15 Sim. 56); Ex parte Pye (2 Spence, 63); Bayley v. Boulcott (4 Euss. 345); Coningham v. Plunke......
- Walrond v Walrond
-
Dipple v Corles
...KeJceivich v. Manning (1 De Gr. M'N. & G. 176), Bentley v. Mackay (15 Beav. 12), Wheatley v. Purr (1 Keen, 551), Stapleton v. Stapleton (14 Sim. 186), M'Fadden v. Jenkyns (1 Hare, 458), Thorpe v. Owen (5 Beav. 224). the vice-chancellor [Sir W. Page Wood]. I do not think that any valid decla......