{
  "id": 8718173,
  "name": "Scott v. Miller",
  "name_abbreviation": "Scott v. Miller",
  "decision_date": "1929-02-18",
  "docket_number": "",
  "first_page": "7",
  "last_page": "10",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "179 Ark. 7"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "Ark.",
    "id": 8808,
    "name": "Arkansas Supreme Court"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 34,
    "name_long": "Arkansas",
    "name": "Ark."
  },
  "cites_to": [
    {
      "cite": "4 S. W. (2d) 953",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "S.W.2d",
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "176 Ark. 1009",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ark.",
      "case_ids": [
        1399860
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ark/176/1009-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "258 S. W. 338",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "S.W.",
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "162 Ark. 247",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ark.",
      "case_ids": [
        1385605
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ark/162/0247-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "131 Am. St. Rep. 82",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Am. St. Rep.",
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "116 S. W. 190",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "S.W.",
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "89 Ark. 182",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ark.",
      "case_ids": [
        1515233
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ark/89/0182-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "5 Atl. 775",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "A.",
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "78 N. E. 55",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "N.E.",
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "40 N. E. 397",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "N.E.",
      "pin_cites": [
        {
          "page": "398"
        }
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "146 N. Y. 13",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.Y.",
      "case_ids": [
        2268573
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ny/146/0013-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "13 Wall. 497",
      "category": "reporters:scotus_early",
      "reporter": "Wall.",
      "case_ids": [
        1134177
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/us/80/0497-01"
      ]
    }
  ],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 216,
    "char_count": 2159,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.488,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 3.5807823438740655e-07,
      "percentile": 0.8867632823380822
    },
    "sha256": "bb1d4208d834dbf6ac07b21c2b0f5dbd98ccd085a7b1b9149bbc0d3ea3fbb875",
    "simhash": "1:a816e7346dc7de23",
    "word_count": 398
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T22:44:09.982065+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "Scott v. Miller."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Kirby, J.\nAppellant insists that the chancellor erred in not holding that the fund could be impressed with a trust, and that the testimony warranted a decree in her favor.\nIt appears to be well settled law, in the absence of statutes providing otherwise, that a trust in personal property may be declared, created, or admitted verbally, and proved by parol testimony. It is said in K. C. L.:\n\u201cIn some jurisdictions an express trust cannot be created by parol, even as to personal property, but the great weight of authority is to the effect that the statute of frauds does not extend to trusts of personal property, and that such trusts may be created and proved by parol. In accordance with this rule it has been uniformly held that an oral promise by a beneficiary in a life insurance contract to pay the proceeds of such policy or a portion thereof to a third person is a valid and enforceable trust.\u201d 26 R. C. L., p. 1194. See also 3 Pomeroy\u2019s Equity (4th ed.) \u00a7\u00a7 1008, 1009, pp. 2232-39; Chew v. Brumagen, 13 Wall. 497, 20 U. S. (L. ed.) 663; Hirsh v. Auer, 146 N. Y. 13, 40 N. E. 397, 398; Catland v. Hoyt, 78 N. E. 55, 5 Atl. 775. The rule of evidence for the establishment of such a trust, however, is different' from the general preponderance rule insisted upon by appellant, clear, convincing and satisfactory evidence being required. 3 Pomeroy Equity, supra.\nIt is stated in R. C. L. that the same degree of proof should be required \u2014 clear, convincing and satisfactory evidence \u2014 to prove such an express trust as to establish a resulting trust. 26 R. C. L., pp. 1203, 1231, \u00a7 44, \u00a7 77; see also Colegrave v. Colegrave, 89 Ark. 182, 116 S. W. 190, 131 Am. St. Rep. 82; Bray v. Timms, 162 Ark. 247, 258 S. W. 338; Scoggin v. Scoggin, 176 Ark. 1009, 4 S. W. (2d) 953.\nThe majority of the court is of opinion \u2014 in which the writer does not agree \u2014 that the proof of appellant is not sufficient to meet the requirements of the rule or establish the trust, and the case must be accordingly affirmed. It is so ordered.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Kirby, J."
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "8am T. Poe, Tom Poe and McDonald Poe, for appellant.",
      "Ira J. Mach, for appellee."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "Scott v. Miller.\nOpinion delivered February 18, 1929.\n8am T. Poe, Tom Poe and McDonald Poe, for appellant.\nIra J. Mach, for appellee."
  },
  "file_name": "0007-01",
  "first_page_order": 25,
  "last_page_order": 28
}