VIGEL
v.
HOPP
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
A woman brought an equity suit to set aside a deed she had executed to a man, claiming it was intended as security for a debt rather than an absolute conveyance, and that the debt had been paid in full. The Supreme Court reversed the lower court's decision, holding that the appellee's testimony, unsupported by sufficient corroborating circumstances, failed to meet the evidentiary standard of two witnesses or one witness corroborated by equivalent circumstances needed to overcome the defendant's denial and establish the alleged trust.
© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Mr. Chief Justice Waite delivered the opinion of the court.
• This is a suit in equity begun by the appellee to set aside a deed executed by her to the appellant, on the ground that the deed, though absolute on its face, was intended only as security for a. debt, which has since been paid in full. There are numerous allegations of fraud, but the" whole scope and purpose of the suit is to-, establish a trust, and get back the property in that way. The answer denies every allegation-of fraud and trust, and insists that the deed was intended-as an absolute conveyance, and not as security. ,-This is responsive. to the bill, and before the relief can be granted which is asked, these denials must be overcome by the-satisfactory testimony of two witnesses,, or of one witness corroborated by circumstances which are equivalent in weight to another. 2 Story, Eq., sect. 1528. - The appellee is the only witness in support of .the bill, and the corroborating circumstances are not, in our opinion, sufficient to overcome the answer. It will serve no useful purpose to enter into analysis of the testimony.
Decree reversed, and cause remanded with instructions to dismiss the bill.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
S. Dev. Co. v. Silva, 125 U.S. 247 (U.S. 1888)…witness with corroborating circumstances, the complainant will not be entitled.to a decree; and this effect of the defendant’s ansAver is not Aveakened by the fact that the equity of the complainant’s bill is the allegation of fraud. Vigel v. Hopp, 104 U. S. 441; Story Eq. Jur. § 1528; Daniell Ch. Pr. 844. The burden of proof is on the complainant; and unless he [*250] brings evidence sufficient to overcome the natural presumption of fair dealing and honesty, a court of equity'will .not be justified in set…
-
Monroe Cattle Co. v. Becker, 147 U.S. 47 (U.S. 1893)…of this, Rhomberg being the only witness examined on the subject the charges of fraud must be regarded as not sustained, if, indeed, the answer be not sufficient for that purpose without other testimony, Hughes v. Blake, 6 Wheat. 453; Vigel v. Hopp, 104 U. S. 441; Beals v. Illinois, Missouri & Texas Railroad, 133 U. S. 290. Upon the other hand, the answer charges that one H. C. Jacobs was county surveyor, and J. L. Fisher was county .judge of Shackleford County; that they were partners as real estate agents…
-
Campbell v. Nw. Eckington Improvement Co., 229 U.S. 561 (U.S. 1913)…hey are of a strength equal to the testimony of a witness, which would be required in order to establish the complainants’ position, they not having waived by their bill answer under oath, and the defendant having answered under oath. Vigel v. Hopp, 104 U. S. 441.” The court therefore held that the prayers of the bill asking that the deed to Campbell be declared to be a security merely, and that the contracts be canceled, should be denied; and that the cause should be referred to the Auditor for a full acco…1 / 4
Previewing 3 of 6 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence