Hale v. Joslin
Cases that cite this one
13 later published cases cite this decision.
- Landry v. Landry (Mass. 1928)
- Wilson v. Jones (Mass. 1932)
- Boyle v. Owens (Mass. 1950)
- Sondheim v. Fenton (Mass. 1950)
- Jones v. Old Colony Trust Co. (Mass. 1925)
- Saltzsieder v. . Saltzsieder (N.Y. 1916)
- Williams v. Kidd (Cal. 1915)
- Dickson v. Miller (Minn. 1914)
- O'Brien v. O'Brien (N.D. 1910)
- Rochester Savings Bank v. Bailey (New York Supreme Court 1901)
- Wright v. Bragg (7th Cir. 1901)
- Daggett v. Simonds (Mass. 1899)
- Williams v. Schatz (Ohio 1884)
This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.
Opinion of the Court
We think the evidence shows that Elijah Hale did not intend that the deed should be delivered until his death. He did not intend that the plaintiff should have any present interest in the deed, but intended to keep in himself the dominion and control of it. It was in the hands of Whitney as a depositary for the grantor, and not as agent or trustee for the grantee. The act was intended to be in the nature of a testamentary act, which could be revoked at any time. As it was in fact revoked, it is not necessary to consider what effect it would have had if there had been no revocation. Fairbanks v. Metcalf, 8 Mass. 230, 237. Hatch v. Hatch, 9 Mass. 307. Rockwood v. Wiggin, 16 Gray, 402. McGrath v. Reynolds, 116 Mass. 566. Shurtleff v. Francis, 118 Mass. 154. Wellborn v. Weaver, 17 Ga. 267. Bill dismissed.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.