Case ID: freem-ch_1/html/0134-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "The Chancellor.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

John Powell v. John M. Powell.
    If A furnish money to B, who agrees to purchase land with the same in the name of A, and B purchases the land and takes title to himself, a trust results, and B will he decreed to make title to A.
    John Powell furnished his son, John M. Powell, with money to buy lands, and take title to John Powell. The lands were bought by John M. Powell, and title taken to himself. John Powell, supposing the title to be taken to himself, entered upon the land and improved forty acres of the same. John M. Powell then claimed the land as his own, and offered it for sale, To prevent this sale, John Powell filed his bill in chancery, stating these facts, and praying that the defendant be injoined from selling the land in controversy, and that he be decreed to malte title to the same to the complainant.
    The defendant denied the allegations of the bill, and stated that he purchased the land with his own money. The complainant then filed an amended bill, denying the truth of the answer, to which defendant responded, and depositions were taken by both parties, the result of which was, the money with which the land was entered belonged to the complainant.
    Daniel Mayes for complainant.
    Crane and Shaw for defendant.
   The Chancellor.

The bill is filed for the purpose of setting up and establishing a resulting trust in favor of the complainant to several parcels of land, which were entered and otherwise purchased in the name of the defendant, with, as the complainant alledges, his money, placed in the hands of the defendant to enter and purchase land for him. The defendant denies that the purchase money belonged to the complainant, and insists it was his own' money. To whom the money belonged, is the only question to determine; the relief asked follows as a matter of course, if the money is shown to have belonged to the complainant. I think the testimony taken in the case can leave no doubt upon the mind of any one. There are various witnesses who clearly disprove the answer, and fully sustain the bill. ‘

There must be a decree for the complainant.