Appeal of Duraind
Cases that cite this one
6 later published cases cite this decision.
- Scott v. Book (Lancaster County Court of Common Pleas 1936)
- Allshouse's Estate (Pa. 1931)
- Kanawell v. Miller (Pa. 1918)
- In re Estate of Tooley (Cal. 1915)
- Davis v. Robinson (Pa. Super. Ct. 1906)
- Benedick v. Benedick (Pa. 1898)
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
A delivery is essentially necessary to give effect to a deed. The signing and sealing thereof are insufficient to bind the grantor, or to pass title to the vendee therein named. In the present case, no question of presumptive or conditional delivery, either to the vendee or to any person for her, arises.
It is conclusively shown that, although the deed was signed and acknowledged, yet in fact it remained in the possession of the person who signed it until her death. Neither the grantee named, nor the persons for whose benefit it professed to be made, gave any consideration therefor, nor were any of them present when it was signed or acknowledged, and they had no knowledge of its existence during the life of the maker. In law it was not a deed.
Decree affirmed, and appeal dismissed at the costs of the appellant.
Case-law data current through September 30, 2026. Source: CourtListener bulk data.