Volume 121 — Indiana Appellate Court Reports

1. TAXATION — <italic>Employment — Employment Security Board —</italic> <italic>Regulations — Regulation as to Successor Employers Acquiring</italic> <italic>Part of Business Void.</italic> — The regulation of the Employment Security Board, providing that an employer acquiring part of a business from one subject to the Employment Security Act, becomes an employer under the act if that part of the business, standing alone, would have made the original employer subject to the act, and if the business continues, and the successor does not assume the reserve or experience account of the original employer, contravenes the provisions of the Employment Security Act and is invalid. Acts 1945, ch. 315, §§ 2(c) (3), 4(c) (5), p. 1393. p. 58. 2. TAXATION — <italic>Employment — Employment Security Act —</italic> <italic>Construction — Successor Employer Acquires Predecessor's</italic> <italic>Reserve Account.</italic> — The Employment Security Act specifically provides that in cases where a successor employer acquires a predecessor business in whole or in part, he is entitled to assume the position of such employer as if no change with respect to such employer's reserve or experience account had occurred. Acts 1945, ch. 315, §§ 2(c) (2), (3), 4(c) (5), p. 1393. p. 59. 3. ADMINISTRATIVE LAW AND PROCEDURE — <italic>Rules and Regulations —</italic> <italic>Validity — Regulations in Conflict With Statutes Are Invalid.</italic> — Rules and regulations promulgated by administrative boards must be reasonable, and such boards cannot enlarge or vary, by operation of such rules, the powers conferred upon them by the legislature; therefore any regulation which is in conflict with the organic law or statutes of the state is wholly invalid. p. 59.

1. APPEAL — <italic>Harmless Error — Demurrer — Overruling Demurrer to</italic> <italic>Complaint — Error Immaterial Where There Are Special Findings</italic> <italic>of Fact and Conclusions of Law.</italic> — Where there are special findings of fact and conclusions of law, any error in overruling the demurrer to the complaint is immaterial. p. 123. 2. APPEAL — <italic>Assignment of Errors — Assigned Error in</italic> <italic>Conclusions of Law Upon Special Findings of Fact —</italic> <italic>Consideration Limited to Facts as Found.</italic> — In assigning error on appeal that the trial court erred in its conclusions of law, the appellants, by contending that there are no facts proven to sustain the complaint and no facts alleged in the complaint to warrant the conclusions of law set out in the record, present no question, because, in determining such an assignment of error, the Appellate Court cannot go to the pleadings or the evidence but must confine its consideration to the facts as found which are presumed to be correctly found. p. 124. 3. TRUSTS — <italic>Creation and Existence — Resulting Trusts —</italic> <italic>Requisites.</italic> — Where a conveyance is made to one person upon the payment of the consideration by another, in order for a resulting trust to arise there must be an agreement that the alienee was to hold the land or an interest therein in trust for the person supplying the consideration; such agreement must have been made before title to the real estate was acquired; there must have been a valuable consideration; the transaction must be free from fraud; and the proof must be clear and unequivocal. Burns' 1943 Replacement, § 56-608. p. 125. 4. TRUSTS — <italic>Creation and Existence — Resulting Trusts —</italic> <italic>Requisites — Agreement Need Not Be Formal.</italic> — The agreement between the parties necessary for the creation of a resulting trust need not be formal, nor is any particular form of words required, and such a trust will not be permitted to fail because of a mere lack of form or method of proof if the evidence clearly and unequivocally establishes the essentials for the creation of such resulting trust. Burns' 1943 Replacement, § 56-608. p. 125. 5. TRUSTS — <italic>Creation and Existence — Resulting Trusts —</italic> <italic>Evidence — Weight and Sufficiency — Sufficient To Show</italic> <italic>Establishment of Trust.</italic> — In an action to acquire title to land through establishment of a resulting trust, the evidence was sufficient<page_number>Page 113</page_number> to support the inferences that title to a farm was taken in the name of the mother, as security for an advancement by her, pursuant to a previous agreement that she was to hold the farm in trust for her two sons until a family settlement was made adjusting the interests of the parties, and that the transaction was free from fraud and not lacking in consideration; therefore, the proof of this agreement being clear and unequivocal, all of the requirements for the establishment of a resulting trust were present. Burns' 1943 Replacement, § 56-608. p. 125. 6. TRUSTS — <italic>Creation and Existence — Resulting Trusts —</italic> <italic>Requisites — Agreement Covering Matters Transpiring Through</italic> <italic>Several Years — Resulting Trust Not Destroyed.</italic> — The fact that the agreement between the parties necessary for the establishment of a resulting trust, once made, might cover matters transpiring through a period of years would not destroy the legal effect of the agreement upon the creation of the resulting trust. Burns' 1943 Replacement, § 56-608. p. 125. 7. DESCENT AND DISTRIBUTION — <italic>Rights and Liabilities of Heirs —</italic> <italic>Family Settlements — Favored by Law.</italic> — Family settlements are especially favored by the law, and are upheld by the courts to encourage and maintain family confidence, and to avoid frauds and the abuse of such confidence. p. 128. 8. DESCENT AND DISTRIBUTION — <italic>Rights and Liabilities of Heirs —</italic> <italic>Advancements — Receiver of Benefits Barred From Attacking</italic> <italic>Family Settlement.</italic> — Where one son received all of the benefits of a family settlement and his full share of an ancestral estate, and, because of his default, an encumbrance was placed on the ancestral farm, he was prevented by the doctrine of advancements from asserting a claim to the land which would pass to the other son and, after his death, to his heirs under the family settlement. p. 128. 9. LIMITATION OF ACTIONS — <italic>Computation of Period of Limitation</italic> <italic>— Resulting Trusts — Statute of Limitations Not Applicable.</italic> — Where a resulting trust arises the statute of limitations has no application. p. 129. 10. STATUTE OF FRAUDS — <italic>Operation and Effect — Oral Contracts</italic> <italic>With Reference to Real Estate Unenforcible.</italic> — An oral contract with reference to real estate is not void but only unenforcible. p. 129. 11. STATUTE OF FRAUDS — <italic>Operation and Effect — Part Performance</italic> <italic>— Non-Compliance Would Work Fraud — Statute Not Applicable.</italic> — Where a contract has been so far performed by one party that a failure of the other to perform would work a<page_number>Page 114</page_number> fraud upon the one complying with the contract, the party who has received the benefits cannot escape performance by by asserting the contract is within the statute of frauds. p. 129. 12. STATUTE OF FRAUDS — <italic>Operation and Effect — Part Performance</italic> <italic>— Non-Compliance Would Work Fraud — Statute Not Applicable.</italic> — Where one son had accepted the benefit of an oral family agreement relative to the distribution of family property, and had received his full share of the ancestral estate, the agreement then had been so far performed that a failure to carry it out to completion would work a fraud upon the heirs of the other son, so that the statute of frauds could not be used to defeat the contract. p. 129.