History
  • No items yet
midpage
Cunningham v. Davis
62 Miss. 366
Miss.
1884
Check Treatment
Campbell, C. J.,

delivered the opinion of the court.

In form the instrument is a deed. It was so called by the maker. It was acknowledged as such by him before a justice of the peace. Its character must be determined from its several provisions. If by it any present interest was vested it should be held to be a deed. If it was not to have any operation or effect until the death of the maker it could not be treated as a deed, although it was so named, and is in form a deed. The provision in these words, “ And that this deed do not take effect until after my death/’ coupled with the direction that the object of the bounty of the maker of the instrument should pay all his debts and have only the remainder of his property, convinces us that the paper was testamentary in its character.

Affirmed.

Case Details

Case Name: Cunningham v. Davis
Court Name: Mississippi Supreme Court
Date Published: Oct 15, 1884
Citation: 62 Miss. 366
Court Abbreviation: Miss.
AI-generated responses must be verified and are not legal advice.
Your Notebook is empty. To add cases, bookmark them from your search, or select Add Cases to extract citations from a PDF or a block of text.