Strout, Admr. v. Burgess Strout, Admr. v. Burgess

Strout, Admr. v. Burgess

144 Me. 263, 68 A.2d 241, ME.0040039(1949)

    • 0,99 €
    • 0,99 €

Publisher Description

This is an appeal from a decision of a single Justice of the Superior Court sitting in equity. The bill was filed by Alfred M. Strout, Administrator of the Estate of Charles T. Burgess against Charles M. Burgess, a nephew of the deceased. It was brought to recover certain certificates of corporate stock contained in a safety deposit box in The Thomaston National Bank in the name of ""Charles T. Burgess or Charles M. Burgess."" The certificates and the shares represented thereby were claimed by the plaintiff as assets of the estate of Charles T. Burgess, and by the bill he sought to recover them from the defendant, who also claimed title thereto. Each of the certificates was issued to ""Charles T. Burgess and Charles M. Burgess as joint tenants with right of survivorship and not as tenants in common."" Included were shares in corporations organized under the laws of some six different states, including Maine. The certificates represented some six hundred fifty shares approximating in value the sum of $13,000. All of the shares were originally the sole property of Charles T. Burgess. The evidence clearly established that Charles T. Burgess, hereafter called the decedent who at the time of his decease was eighty-nine years of age, had made his home with the defendant for almost six years next prior to his death, except for a period of three months, commencing early in January, 1944 when he was in a nursing home. Prior to making his home with the defendant the decedent had conveyed his farm to another person by a deed conditioned for his support and burial. This arrangement not being satisfactory it had been cancelled by mutual consent and the property reconveyed. Sometime in the early part of 1941, the decedent came to live with the defendant, his nephew, under an arrangement whereby it was agreed that he would live with him, on trial as it were, to see whether or not conditions would be to his satisfaction, he paying board in the meantime. If things were satisfactory to him a permanent arrangement was to be effected whereby the defendant would receive his property in return for his support and burial.

GENRE
Professional & Technical
RELEASED
1949
12 August
LANGUAGE
EN
English
LENGTH
39
Pages
PUBLISHER
LawApp Publishers
SIZE
72.4
KB
Town of Warren v. Norwood Town of Warren v. Norwood
1941
Davis v. Simpson Davis v. Simpson
1941
Smith v. State Smith v. State
1950
Medomak Canning Co. v. York Medomak Canning Co. v. York
1948
Harvey v. Rackliffe Harvey v. Rackliffe
1945
Carson Carson
1944