Summary

Ward Hunt Adams v. Adams — Opinion of the Court

We are of opinion that the refusal of Appleton, in 1870, to accept the deed, or to act as trustee, is not a controlling circumstance.
Although a trustee may never have heard of the deed, the title vests in him, subject to a disclaimer on his part. [4] Such disclaimer will not, however, defeat the conveyance as a transfer of the equitable interest to a third person. [5] A trust cannot fail for want of a trustee, or by the refusal of all the trustees to accept the trust. The court of chancery will appoint new trustees.
Source: Wikisource

Ward Hunt Adams v. Adams — Opinion of the Court

The defendant now seeks to repudiate what he then intended, and to overthrow what he then asserted and believed he had then accomplished.
It may be conceded, as a general rule, that delivery is essential, both in law and in equity, to the validity of a gift, whether of real or personal estate. [1] What constitutes a delivery is a subject of great difference of opinion, some cases holding that a parting with a deed, even for the purpose of recording, is in itself a delivery.
Source: Wikisource

Get perspective with Kwize: daily news enlightened by great literature