{
  "id": 1543570,
  "name": "Smithwick v. Bank of Corning",
  "name_abbreviation": "Smithwick v. Bank of Corning",
  "decision_date": "1910-06-27",
  "docket_number": "",
  "first_page": "463",
  "last_page": "464",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "95 Ark. 463"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "Ark.",
    "id": 8808,
    "name": "Arkansas Supreme Court"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 34,
    "name_long": "Arkansas",
    "name": "Ark."
  },
  "cites_to": [
    {
      "cite": "179 N. Y. 112",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.Y.",
      "case_ids": [
        2318653
      ],
      "opinion_index": -1,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ny/179/0112-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "80 N. Y. 422",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.Y.",
      "case_ids": [
        2173249
      ],
      "opinion_index": -1,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ny/80/0422-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "75 N. Y. 134",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.Y.",
      "case_ids": [
        536939
      ],
      "opinion_index": -1,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ny/75/0134-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "65 Ark. 503",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ark.",
      "case_ids": [
        609272
      ],
      "weight": 2,
      "opinion_index": -1,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ark/65/0503-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "56 Ark. 391",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ark.",
      "case_ids": [
        1326123
      ],
      "opinion_index": -1,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ark/56/0391-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "34 Ark. 421",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ark.",
      "case_ids": [
        1875695
      ],
      "opinion_index": -1,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ark/34/0421-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "22 Ark. 191",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ark.",
      "case_ids": [
        8726074
      ],
      "opinion_index": -1,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ark/22/0191-01"
      ]
    }
  ],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 250,
    "char_count": 2826,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.695,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 1.620672357195734e-07,
      "percentile": 0.6871881333622153
    },
    "sha256": "98d1333839c5c7de1ca9fc5748cac0713f479df7d5f4e4282b34367bf6591195",
    "simhash": "1:f0c57765202d890e",
    "word_count": 500
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T15:58:46.449655+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "Smithwick v. Bank of Corning."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Battle, J.\nOn the 27th day of January, 1901, J. J. Smith-wick departed this life, intestate, leaving C. A. Smithwick, his widow, and W. R. Smithwick his only heir. At the time of his .death he was the owner of considerable real estate, and two thousand dollars in cash and notes, and about forty head of cattle. After his death the widow and heir by a written contract divided the estate of the deceased between themselves. In the division some money was set apart to the widow. She deposited it in a bank to her credit. She often referred to it as W. R. Smithwick\u2019s money, but never relinquished control over it, and always controlled it, collecting interest on it.\nMrs. Smithwick died on the 16th day of July, 1908, leaving a last will and testament. She left nothing to W. R. Smith-wick. G. B. Oliver became administrator of her estate. W. R. Smithwick brought a suit against the bank, claiming the money deposited in the bank as held in trust for him. Oliver, as administrator, was made a defendant.\n. The court, after hearing the evidence, dismissed the complaint for want of equity; and plaintiff appealed.\nThe money received by the widow in the division of the estate of her husband was her absolute property. Her frequent declarations that it was the appellant\u2019s money did not convert it into a trust fund. They manifested an intention to give the same to appellant at some time. But they were not based on any consideration, and were not binding on her. Intention without acts is of no effect.\nDecree affirmed.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Battle, J."
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "/. P. Taylor and P. G. Taylor, for appellant.",
      "G. B. Oliver, for appellee."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "Smithwick v. Bank of Corning.\nOpinion delivered June 27, 1910.\nTrusts \u2014 declaration.\u2014Where a widow, to whom her husband left money, frequently spoke of such money as belonging to her husband's sole heir, but died leaving such heir nothing in her will, her declaration, being without consideration, did not convert the money into a trust fund.\nAppeal from Clay Chancery Court, Western District; pdwcM'd D. Roberteson, Chancellor;\naffirmed.\n/. P. Taylor and P. G. Taylor, for appellant.\nThe court erred in making the administrator a party defendant. 22 Ark. 191. The action of the bank in paying the money to the administrator was a conversion of the money. 34 Ark. 421. The court should not have transferred the cause to chancery. 56 Ark. 391; 65 Ark. 503; 1T3 U. S. 550. A delivery is not necessary to constitute a trust. 75 N. Y. 134; 31 Am. R. 446; 80 N. Y. 422; 179 N. Y. 112; 105 N. Y. s. 332.\nG. B. Oliver, for appellee.\nThe administrator was properly made a party defendant. Kirby\u2019s Dig., \u00a7 \u00a7 6006, 6011, 6145. The administrator\u2019s evidence was competent. Kirby\u2019s Dig., \u00a7 3093. A court of law would have instructed a verdict for defendants. 65 Ark. 503. Incomplete voluntary trusts are not inforcible. Pom. Eq. Jur., \u00a7 997; Perry on Trusts, \u00a7 96; 28 Am. & Eng. Enc. Daw, 892; 12 E. R. A. (N. S.) 547-"
  },
  "file_name": "0463-01",
  "first_page_order": 487,
  "last_page_order": 488
}