25 Tenn. App. 621 - Mercy v. Miller’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

14 state decisions

Most-quoted passages

The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 14 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “(1) Despite Code, section 7831 (4), which requires transfers of real estate to be in writing signed by the transferrer, a parol gift of land coupled with an entry by the donee and adverse possession by him for more than seven years will vest him with a possessory or defensive right to the land, under the second section of the act of 1819, Code, section 8584. Choate v. Sewell, 142 Tenn., 487 , 221 S.W., 190 . But such a claimant has the burden of proving, by evidence entirely satisfactory, not only the gift, but also his adverse possession. Jordan and Ransom v. Maney, 78 Tenn. (10 Lea), 135, 145. (2-5) The Chancellor saw and heard the witnesses in this case, and his decree comes here supported by a presumption that it is correct, unless the evidence preponderates against it. Code, sec. 10622; Joest v. John A. Denie’s Sons Co., 174 Tenn., 410, 416 , 126 S.W.(2d), 312, 314. We think the evidence for defendant does not preponderate against the decree. The opportunity and facility for fraud in setting up parol gifts, after the death of the alleged donor, make it the duty of a court to give close scrutiny to evidence offered to prove such a gift. Atchley v. Rimmer, 148 Tenn., 303, 312 , 255 S.W., 266 , 30 A.L.R., 1481 , 1486; Chandler v. Roddy, 163 Tenn., 338, 349, 350 , 43 S.W.(2d), 397; Nashville Trust Co. v. Williams, 15 Tenn.App., 445, 452 . To sustain such a gift, the proof must be “ample, clear and convincing” as to every fact necessary to make out the gift. Atchley v. Rimmer”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Walker v. Moore