« PreviousContinue »
3. G. F. by luis will bequeathed the residuum
of his estate to his only child J. F, and to
W. J. “in trust for his son J. F. for bis
support and that of his family." He made
no disposition of the remainder after the
It seems, That such a trust
is valid and is one for the benefit of J. F.
and his family for the life of J. F. Upon
the death of G. F. the remainder, subject
to the life trust estate, vested at once in J.
F. and could be disposed of by himn.-
Crandall v. Fowler et al., 139.
4. A special guardian, appointed in proceed-
ings for the sale of infant's real estate, took
a mortgage on the premises to secure a part
of the purchase money ; he afterwards
foreclosed the mortgage, bid off the prop-
erty, and took a deed of the same to liim-
power to compel him to convey to the ward
and to set aside a mortgage executed by
him on the property, and that he could not
defeat an application for that purpose by
fund, used the securities in his own busi- would not divest the ward of her contin-
5. Defendant's testator deposited certain
money in bank to his credit in trust for
plaintiff, and informed her mother of the
fact. He afterwards withdrew this deposit
and others of like nature and deposited the
whole in another bank to his credit as trus-
tee, where it remained until his death.
This was done without plaintiff's know).
edge. Held, That the fact that he withdrew
the deposit was not legitimate evidence
trust vests in the Supreme Court under was made, to create a beneficial trust for
ing been reserved, the trust was irrevocable
and that the right of action in favor of
plaintiff did not accrue until testator's death.
Mabie v. Bailey, 507.
See ACCOUNTING ; Banks, 1; BAR, 7 ; Exec-
UTORS, &c., 6.
appealed from, or any part thereof, is
attirmed, or the appeal is dismissed, the ap-
pellant will pay the sum recovered or
directed to be paid by the affirmance, or the
the part thereof as to which it is affirmed,'
does not comply with $ 1327 of the Code of
Civ. Pro. and will not be approved. - Hol-
as was expec:ed threw very little light on
employer to borrow from his employee. or
See CONTRACT, 16 ; ESTOPPEL, 6.
made by a building association organized
ings Aid Assn. v. Reed, 169.
M. $1,000 and that he would give mortga-
v. Cudlipp et al., 176.
other with the usury laws before their eyes
I. Upon a motion to change the place of trial
the defendant's affidavit must satisfy the
Ins. Co., 89.
under subd. 3 of $ 987, for convenience of
well v, Romer et al., 440.
must be read in connection with section
The South Boston Iron Co., 529.
the place of trial on the ground of the con-
4. One who has money to loan or invest has
a right to require, in order that he may ob-
quired that a purchase money mortgage be
P., who employed him at a fixel salary to
See SHERIFFS, 1, 2.
1. A verification to a petition which states
that petitioner knows the contents thereof
re application for accounting of Macaulay, 445.
tain specified real property, yet if it plainly
appears from the will ibat it was the in-
the bounds of a proposed village exceeds should make a complete division and dis-
happening of a certain event, and such
division cannot be made without a sale of
his real property, a power of sale of such
real property will be impliedly given to
title to such properly.-Id.
upon other evidence satisfactory to the
surrogate.-In re will of Cottrell, 167.
5. A legacy limited to property in a particular
to her daughter, and by a subsequent
clause provided that in case the daughter
should die without issue the property
should be enjoyed by testatrix's husband
and sister, and after their death to be di.
vided among her brothers ; the devise over
to be contingent upon the daughter's dying
without issue. Held, That the daughter
and not an absolute fec.—In re application
of the N. Y., L. & W. RR. Co. to acquire lands
of Van Zandt, 211.
7. Where one of the witnesses to a will tes.
tifies to facts showing a strict compliance
with the statute, the want of memory of
the other witness will not overcome the
positive testimony.-In re probate will of
8. The evidence of persons who were acci-
dentally present at the execution of the
will, but who had nothing to do with it,
is not entitled to the same weight as that
given by the subscribing witnesses.-Id.
has been rendered by the Surrogate on
conflicting evidence and affirmed by the
Court of Appeals.-Id.
any devise, legacy, interest or appointment
made to such witness is void under the
statute.-In re will of Orson, 306.
power of sale to his exccutors of only cer during the lifetime of the devisee, to whom
a fee was devised determinable on her death
on file in Cadiz, Spain, and cannot be taken
Code. — Younger v. Duffie, 366.
of a devisce involving the construction of a
-Alger v. Alger, 370.
named; the heirs of any wlio died before
21. The word “heirs" when applied to per-
sonal property has no broader signification
will not be presumed that the statute law of
another State is the same as our own.--Id.
able and descendible. - Kenyon v. See et
estate to A. in trust to pay the income to B.
without regard to the place of its execution
22. Testatrix bequeathed her property to her
two daughters in equal parts, each to come
23. Testator bequeathed legacies “out of the
remainder of my estate not hereinbefore
24. Testator gave and devised a portion of his
estate to his executois in trust to apply the
19. A commission should be granted to ex-
amine non-resident witnesses whose evi.
of her husband her estate should be divided
25. If from the cross-cxamination of the sub.
scribing witnesses to a will it can be said that
26. That a conversation is coherent and intel-
ligent is a fact, not an opinion.-Id.
probate of one of the duplicates is sufficient.
28. The petition for probate of such will
need not state that it was executed in dupli-
of a will presented for probate the surro-
the will of testator.-Id.
upon its face and there is no circumstance
before or after execution.-Id.
of testator's estate during his daughter's
indefinite as to be incapable of being exe-
Prichard et al. v. Thompson, 511.
property to his executors in trust to distrib.
be the recipients of the bequest.-Id.
gations filed for a revocation of probate on
35. The mere filing of allegations against the
probate of a will for the purpose of procur-
and served within the year.-Id.
Chap. 319, Laws of 1818, has exclusive ref.
Hollis v. Hoilis et al., 544.
qucathed to such corporation more than
the statute is not violated.-Id.
made by testator's wife when he was on his
upon his mind. - Id.
was either circumstantial or expert opinions
41. Specimens of the handwriting of a testa-
tor are admissible to enable experts to
daughter. By a codicil he provided that
43. When the language used by a testator has
a plain meaning, and is neither uncertain,