1 § 165 a. A resulting trust is to be performed or executed by the trustee by transferring the title to the cestui que trust at his request; but if the trustee has incurred any expenses upon the estate by paying taxes or making improvements, or advancing part of the purchase-money, he will be allowed to hold the estate until his advances are repaid.2 1 Millard v. Hathaway, 27 Cal. 119. order to rebut the presumption of gift alleged the fraudulent purpose of escaping taxation. For a criticism of this case see 18 Harvard Law Rev. 547. In Derry v. Fielder, 216 Mo. 177, the court declined to declare a resulting trust where a purchaser in the name of his grandchild, in order to rebut the presump tion of gift, set up that the purpose of taking title in this was to prevent his wife from acquiring dower rights. Most courts, however, would not consider this purpose fraudulent per se. Seaman v. Harmon, 192 Mass. 5; Phelps v. Phelps, 143 N. Y. 197; Nichols v. Park, 79 N. Y. S. 547, 78 App. Div. 95. CHAPTER VI. Illustrations of actual fraud. The misrepresentations and frauds that equity will relieve against. § 167. CONSTRUCTIVE TRUSTS. § 166. General nature of constructive trusts. They arise from fraud. Jurisdiction of equity over them, and the relief given by converting the offending party into a trustee. § 170. § 171. Principles upon which equity gives relief against fraud. § 172. § 173. § 174. § 175. § 176. § 177. § 178. § 179. § 180. § 181. § 182. The misrepresentation must be of facts material to the contract. The misrepresentation must be of something peculiarly within the party's knowledge. The relief will depend upon the form in which it is sought. Fraud that arises from concealment, or suppressio veri. This kind of fraud depends much upon the relation of the parties. When a person may not be silent. Suppressio veri is generally in law an affirmative act. Courts will relieve where acts are fraudulently prevented from being done illustrations. Trust established where a party fraudulently prevents a will from being made in another's favor. 183. Trust established in odium spoliatoris. § 184. § 185. Trust established upon a conveyance made in ignorance or mistake. But if the conveyance is a compromise, courts will support it if possible. 186. Trust established when a deed by mistake contains more land than was intended. § 187. Misrepresentation of the value of property and inadequacy of consideration. Catching bargains with young heirs and reversioners. Where several of these circumstances are found combined. Frauds that arise by construction from the fiduciary relations of parties. § 199. § 200. § 201. § 195. § 196. §§ 197, 198. Between trustee and cestui que trust. Renewal of leases in his own name by trustee. Contracts prohibited between trustee and cestui que trust, but the cestui que trust alone can avoid them. Rule does not apply to dry trustees. Guardians and wards. Parents and children. § 208. § 209. Other fiduciary relations. § 210. Directors of corporations. Trusts that arise out of inducements held out for marriage. Undefined fiduciary and friendly relations. § 211. Trusts arising from the frauds of third persons. § 212. § 213. § 214. § 215. § 216. § 217. § 218. § 219. § 220. § 221. § 222. § 223. § 224. § 225. § 226. Frauds upon third persons as creditors, etc Conveyances by man or woman on the point of marriage. Fraud by pretending to buy for another. Devises or conveyances upon secret illegal trusts. The safeguards thrown around such purchases. The consideration must have been actually paid. Notice may be actual or constructive. Purchase of property from executors or administrators real estate. Personal property. Constructive trusts may be proved by parol - statute of frauds does not apply. § 227. The right to set aside a conveyance for fraud is an equitable estate that may be conveyed and devised. §§ 228-230. Statute of frauds and the time within which steps must be taken to avoid a fraudulent conveyance. § 166. THE trusts thus far considered arise from the express agreements and intentions of the parties, or from their intentions implied from their agreements, or result from their express or implied agreements. These trusts arise, result, or are implied from the contracts and relations of the parties. The intention of the parties as manifested in contracts made in good faith is the foundation of them. There is another large class of trusts which arise from frauds committed by one party upon another. Thus, if one party procures the legal title to property from another by fraud or misrepresentation or concealment, or if a party makes use of some influential or confidential relation which he holds towards the owner of the legal title, to obtain such legal title from him upon more advantageous terms than he could otherwise have obtained it, equity will convert such party thus obtaining property into a trustee. If a person obtains the legal title to property by such arts or acts or circumstances of circumvention, imposition, or fraud, or if he obtains it by virtue of a confidential relation and influence under such circumstances that he ought not, according to the rules of equity and good conscience as administered in chancery, to hold and enjoy the beneficial interest of the property, courts of equity, in order to administer complete justice between the parties, will raise a trust by construction out of such circumstances or relations; and this trust they will fasten upon the conscience of the offending party and will convert him into a trustee of the legal title, and order him to hold it or to execute the trust in such manner as to protect the rights of the defrauded party and promote the safety and interests of society. Such trusts are called constructive trusts. They differ from other trusts in that they are not within the intention or contemplation of the parties at the time the contract is made from which they are construed by the court, but they are thrust upon a party contrary to his intention and against his consent. The reason is that courts of equity have a large jurisdiction over all matters of trust and confidence. They control and direct their administration, and in certain cases they annul and put an end to them by directing the trustee to convey the trust property to the person beneficially interested. They can also remove the trustees and appoint new ones. Therefore, courts of equity by raising a trust by construc 1 Thompson v. Thompson, 16 Wis. 91; McLane v. Johnson, 43 Vt. 48; Pillow v. Brown, 26 Ark. 240; Collins v. Collins, 6 Lans. 368; Hollingshed v. Simms, 51 Cal. 158; Hendrix v. Nunn, 46 Tex. 141; Kayser v. Maugham, 8 Col. 232; Johnson v. Giles, 69 Ga. 652. tion in cases of fraud can do equal and complete justice between the parties. By this fiction of a constructive trust courts of equity have great powers. They can order the constructive trustee to hold the legal title for the original owner upon just and proper terms. If he has paid any value for the legal estate, they can order the estate to stand as security for it; they can order accounts to be taken and settled; they can decree a reconveyance of the property, or they can put an end to the trust by declaring the conveyances to the constructive trustee to be null and void, and order that they be surrendered up and cancelled. In all such cases the relief is really founded on fraud and not on constructive trust. When it is said that the person who fraudulently receives or possesses himself of trust property, or who has defrauded another of his estate by misrepresentation, concealment, or other fraudulent practices, is converted by the court into a trustee and ordered to account for or reconvey the property, the expression is used for the purpose of describing the nature and extent of the remedy against him, and it denotes that the parties defrauded or beneficially entitled have the same rights and remedies against him as they would be entitled to against an express trustee who had fraudulently committed a breach of the trust. Generally speaking, the constructive trusts dedescribed in this chapter are not trusts at all in the strict and proper signification of the word "trusts; " but as courts are agreed in administering the same remedy in a certain class of frauds as are administered in fraudulent breaches of trusts, and as courts and the profession have concurred in calling such frauds constructive trusts, there can be no misapprehension in continuing the same phraseology, while a change might lead to confusion and misunderstanding.2 (a) 1 Tompson v. Thompson, 16 Wis. 91; McLane v. Johnson, 43 Vt. 48; Collins v. Collins, 6 Lans. (N. Y.) 368. 2 See Westbury, Lord Chancellor, in Rolfe v. Gregory, 4 De G., J. & S. 679. (a) A constructive trust arising from a wrongful purchase in one's own name with another's funds "is not merely a right or cause of action |