History
  • No items yet
midpage
White v. White
52 Ark. 188
Ark.
1889
Check Treatment
Per Curiam.

Advancement: Statute of Limitations. The presumption of the law is that the purchase of the land in controversy was by way of advancement to the son. Robinson v. Robinson, 43 Ark., 481. The proof does not overcome this presumption.

The statute of limitations does not aid defendant under the facts of this case. The oceupancy of .each was with reference to parental and filial duty. White and Tudot’s Leading Cases in Eq., vol. 1, pt. 1, p. 331; Sidmouth v. Sidmouth, 2 Beavans, 447.

The decree is reversed with costs, and the cause remanded with direction to the Washington Circuit Court to enter a decree giving plaintiff possession of the premises sued for.

Case Details

Case Name: White v. White
Court Name: Supreme Court of Arkansas
Date Published: May 15, 1889
Citation: 52 Ark. 188
Court Abbreviation: Ark.
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.