Taylor's Estate

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Taylor's Estate, 154 Pa. 183 (Pa. 1893)
25 A. 1061; 1893 Pa. LEXIS 865
Dean, Green, McCollum, Mitchell, Paxson, Pee, Sterrett

Taylor's Estate

Opinion of the Court

Pee Curiam,

We think-the testimony of the witness, George W. Hubbert, was properly admitted. He had no interest in the matter in controversy. He was not a party in any sense of the term. He was at most a mere conduit through which the sum in controversy was to pass to Mrs. Taylor.

Nor do we think it was error to award the fund to the administrator of Mrs. Taylor. The check was drawn upon the bank for the full amount on deposit, under circumstances which showed that it was intended as an assignment of the fund. It did not come within the principle of that class of cases which holds that a check drawn in the ordinary form vests no title to the general funds of the drawer in the bank upon which it is drawn. It more nearly resembles Hemphill v. Yerkes, 132 Pa. 545.

Judgment affirmed.

Reference

Full Case Name
Taylor's Estate. Ruffell's Appeal
Cited By
13 cases
Status
Published
Syllabus
Evidence — Competency of witness — Party dead — Payee of check. The payee of a check is a competent witness to prove that the check was drawn in the maker’s lifetime in order to enable the payee to collect the money and pay it over to another person to whom the maker intended to present the money as a gift. Gift — Equitable assignment — Check. Where a check is drawn for the whole amount of a deposit in bank, and the drawer intends, by means of the check, to make a gift to another of the whole fund, the check will operate as an equitable assignment of the fund.