This agreement arbitration also begins vvith the following recita!, to Whereas Treat and has been for more than five years past the ovvner an undivided two-thirds interest in three hundred and forty acres land in sections fourteen, fifteen and twenty-three In township fifty-four, range thirty-seven, Flatte county, Missouri, and Russell the owner of the undivided one-thlrd thereof. novv, therefore, agreed that J.
Blythe, John Page and William Reece and they are hereby appointed and agreed npon through the accounts each and both said parties, etc. The complainants say, in substance, that they signed these several written documents, being at the time ignorant or unconscious the recitals which they contained, and with respect the contract oi May, containing the above-quoted recital as the ownership the land, they allege that their signatures thereto were obtained the false representation the defendant that was merely a mortgage the crops and produce the land, given secure the payment the sum, which the complainants admit that they then owed the defendant for help writing thesis statement money theretofore advanced him for their benefit in keeping down the interest the mortgage. It therefore urged in their behalf that, as they were not aware the recitals, they not serve estop the complainants from denying papers writing help that the defendant a joint owner the property, and that they should not even regarded as admissions or evidence such joint ownership. But have cheapest essays writing services not been able adopt this view the case. The complainants were able read and write, and they seem possess the average intelligence persons in their station in life. They had full opportunity read the instruments containing the aforesaid recitals before signing them, and, as certain disputes had already arisen between themselves and the defendant before the several documents were prepared for signature, we find ourselves wholly unable credit the statement that they signed the instruments in question without being aware the admissions which they contained.
Paraphrasing activities for middle school
Moreover, even if were able believe that the several documents were signed the complainants without reading them, and in ignorance the recitals, yet the law would not excuse them for their negligence in signing written agreements such importance as these appear have been without taking the pains read them and ascertain what statements they contained and what obligations they imposed. Enough friction already existed between the parties wheh the documents were executed. Their relations at the time had become far strained that the complainants should content writing services company have read these several instruments carefully before executing them, and feel constrained elieve that they did examine them, or at least that they had a fair understanding their contents, before they executed them.
No other conclusion than this seems admissible in view ail the facts and circumstances of In addition the recitals last mentioned, the record alsO contains evidence oral statements made at least five different per sons at various times the complainant Russell, wiiich statements are in the nature admissions that defendant was a joint owner The learned judge the trial court seems have been largely infiuenced his decision that the deed April, was obtained fraudulently and deceitfully the thought that the oral agreement in virtue which the land was bought and in execution of which the deed was made and delivered was an unconscionable agreement, according the testimony the defendant, in that imposed an excessive burden upon the complainant Russell, and that oughl not given efifect for that reason.
Paraphrasing a paragraph
We entirely agree with the view that the contract in question did i need someone to write an essay for me impose the complainant Russell what seems now have been term paper writing service an undue burden in that obligated him till the land when was bought, or see that was properly tilled, and apply the rents and profits the extinguishment the mortgage indebtedness, whiCh, when extinguished, would make him the owner only a one-third interest in the land, while the defendant would become the owner the remaining two-thirds. In view this outcome, the bargain as made, seems, at the present time, have been unfair. We conceive, however, that Russell's desire obtain at least one-third the land at the time the bargain was made may have been strong, and the difïiculties which stood in the way his obtaining the necessary funds buy the entire tract may have been great, that was entirely willing enter into the contract with the defendant for a joint purchase.
He may have perceived, or at least thought that perceived, some peculiar advantage himself in allying himself with the defendant in making the purchase the terms proposed. It may haye seemed the only way open him at the time press release writing service becoming the owner a part the land, and may have been willing assume the burden which the contract imposed accomplish that end. At ail events, in view the situation the complainants at the time the agreement was entered into and the motives which may have actuated them at the time, it does not appear that the bargain was unreasonable or unconscionable as justify the inference that was never made, and that the deed April, was not consciously executed the cornplainants, but was obtained through some trick or artifice, and is ther'efore fraudulent. This being a proceeding, far as the complainants are concerned, set aside a deed bearing their genuine signatures, solely the ground that was procured through some trick or artifice, which deed, its face, appears have been formally executed, and have been duly recorded in the proper office very shortly after was executed, and have remained unchallenged any one for at least four years, and the rule being, in this class cases, that warrant a court equity in setting such a conveyance aside the proof the alleged fraud must clear, satisfactory, and convincing the mind the chancellor hesitation in holding that the proof contained in this record the deed April, ought not set aside. In view of what has already been said concerning the character the evidence, is obvions that the proof which was relied upon the complainants obtain the cancellation the deed neither clear, satisfactory, nor convincing. Indeed, does not seem preponderate in their favor. It results from this conclusion that the relief treated for the complainants in their bill ought not have been granted, and that the decree the lower court was erroneous. We have next consider and determine what action shall taken the defendant's cross-bill, which reference has already been made in the foregoing statement. By the terms the decree which was entered in the lower court, the cross-bill was dismissed. This cross-bill appears have been filed the defendant mainly with a view obtaining a receiver the property while the litigation concerning the ownership thereof was in progress, and incidentally to obtain an accounting the rents, issues, and products the land which had been received the complainant Russell during the years, both inclusive.