
    SINCLAIR v. SINCLAIR.
    (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department.
    March 15, 1912.)
    Deeds" (§ 69*)—Validity—Meeting op the Minds of the Parties.
    A deed of a grantor who did not understand the purport of the deed, and who never knowingly or voluntarily executed or acknowledged the execution of it, is void for failure of the minds of the parties thereof to meet.
    [Ed. Note.—For other cases, see Deeds, Cent. Dig. §§ 156-164; Dec. Dig. § 69.*]
    Appeal from Special Term, 'Kings County.
    Action by Catherine Sinclair against Sarah F. Sinclair. From a part of the judgment, defendant appeals. Affirmed on conditions.
    Argued before JENICS, P. J., and HIRSCHBERG, THOMAS, CARR, and RICH, JJ.
    William J. Martin (Frank A. Spencer, Jr., on the brief), for appellant.
    Edward J. West, for respondent.
   PER CURIAM.

The finding that the deeds were procured from the plaintiff by fraud and imposition on the part of the defendant and Green is not sustained by the weight of the evidence. Hence the conclusion of law and judgment so far as based on such finding cannot be sustained. But the evidence does sustain the finding that the plaintiff did not understand or comprehend the nature and purport of the deeds, and never knowingly or voluntarily executed or acknowledged the execution of the same.

Therefore the judgment is reversed and a new trial granted, costs to abide the event, unless the plaintiff shall within 20 days stipulate to modify the judgment so as to provide that the several deeds are void for failure of the minds of the parties thereto to meet for the execution thereof, in which case the judgment as so modified is affirmed, without costs of this appeal.  