In re Estate of Fallon v. Fallon
| Docket Number: | 2009-CA-00157-COA | |
| Court of Appeals: |
Opinion Link Opinion Date: 03-23-2010 Opinion Author: Irving, J. Holding: Affirmed |
|
| Additional Case Information: |
Topic: Wills & estates - Inter vivos deed - Lack of consideration Judge(s) Concurring: King, C.J., Lee and Myers, P.JJ., Griffis, Barnes, Ishee, Roberts and Maxwell, JJ. Non Participating Judge(s): Carlton, J. Procedural History: Bench Trial Nature of the Case: CIVIL - WILLS, TRUSTS, AND ESTATES |
|
| Trial Court: |
Date of Trial Judgment: 12-18-2008 Appealed from: George County Chancery Court Judge: Randy Grant Pierce Disposition: REFUSED TO SET ASIDE INTER VIVOS DEED FOR LACK OF CONSIDERATION Case Number: 2006-0064RP |
|
| Note: | Due to a military leave of absence, Hon. Virginia C. Carlton did not participate in this hand down. | |
| Party Name: | Attorney Name: | Brief(s) Available: | ||
| Appellant: | In the Matter of the Estate of Lessie Fallon, Deceased: John Wendell Fallon, Executor |
DARRYL A. HURT JR. |
||
| Appellee: | Jimmy Glenn Fallon and Any and All Other Unknown Heirs At Law of Emma Lee Fallon, Deceased, and Any and All Other Persons Claiming To Have Interest In Real Proper | JACK PARSONS, TADD PARSONS | ||
Synopsis provided by:  If you are interested in subscribing to the weekly synopses of all Mississippi Supreme Court and Court of Appeals hand downs please contact Tammy Upton in the MLI Press office. |
|
| Topic: | Wills & estates - Inter vivos deed - Lack of consideration |
| Summary of the Facts: | John Fallon, in his capacity as administrator of the estate of his mother, Lessie Fallon, filed a complaint to set aside a deed from her to his sister, Emma Fallon. The chancellor found that the deed was supported by sufficient consideration and refused to set it aside. John appeals. |
| Summary of Opinion Analysis: | John argues that sufficient consideration did not exist to support Lessie’s conveyance to Emma. The chancellor, in his judgment, concluded that “it is undisputed that Emma provided love, companionship and care for her mother during her life. As such, proper consideration was given in exchange for [the] property deeded from Lessie to Emma.” The deed, by its terms, does not provide that the property was being conveyed because of the love, companionship, and care provided by Emma. Also, the record does not contain any evidence of an agreement between Lessie and Emma whereby Lessie agreed to convey the land to Emma in return for Emma taking care of her. However, this absence of evidence is not fatal to the validity of the deed. The deed acknowledges the receipt and sufficiency of other good and valuable consideration not mentioned in the deed. There is a presumption in this state that where the instrument in controversy contains a statement or recital of consideration, it creates a rebuttable presumption that consideration actually existed. The general rule is that this presumption is established even by such expressions as ‘for value,’ ‘for good and sufficient consideration,’ ‘for value received’ or ‘for valuable consideration.’ John failed to rebut the presumption that the consideration recited in the deed from Lessie to Emma in fact existed. |
Home | Terms of Use | About the JDP | Feedback | Using JDP | MC Law Library | Mississippi Supreme Court
