Plaintiff in error brought suit against certain named persons, seeking to cancel a deed, to recover a child’s part of the land described in the above-mentioned deed, to recover a year’s support out of said land, and to recover an indebtedness claimed against said land. The petition alleged in substance that plaintiff was the widow of G. G. Smith, deceased; that she was married to the deceased on February 15, 1949, and that on April 15, 1952, he deserted her without any fault on her part;, that at the time they lived together as husband and wife, the deceased was seized and possessed of a certain described tract of land; that on the first day of July, 1952, defendants prevailed upon the deceased to give them a deed to the described property, and that the only consideration was love and affection; that the deceased never delivered the deed or parted with possession; that the whole procedure under which defendants secured the deed was an effort to defraud plaintiff of her right to a child’s part and a year’s support out of the propertjr; that plaintiff has a claim of $485 against the said property of the deceased as money advanced to the deceased at the time he purchased the property; that plaintiff has no adequate remedy at law; and that a suit in equity will avoid a multiplicity of suits. The prayers were that the deed above referred to be delivered up and canceled; that plaintiff recover judgment against the property in the sum of $485; that the court’s writ of partition be granted in order to protect the interest of petitioner; that petitioner receive a child’s part out of the propertjr herein described; and that petitioner be granted a year’s support out of said property. Defendants filed general and special demurrers to the petition, and all were duly sustained. The exception here is to this judgment. Held:
1. It is not entirely clear from the instant petition just what the cause of action is upon which the plaintiff seeks to recover. Apparently, however, the suit is one to cancel a deed, with several additional grounds for various types of relief added thereto. Thus considered, it is clear that
2. While we are not entirely certain that petitioner can include in a single petition all the various causes of action and forms of relief here sought, we are certain that the petition in the instant case does not set out a cause of action in equity for any of the relief sought.
3. It was, therefore, not error to sustain a general demurrer to the petition.
4. Since a judgment sustaining a general demurrer to the petition is here being sustained, it becomes unnecessary to consider the several grounds of special demurrer.
Judgment affirmed.