Hasbrouck v. . Vandervoort and Hayward
New York Court of Appeals
This was an action in the superior court of the city of New-York, by the plaintiff as trustee of the estate of Adeline Pickering, the wife of William L. Pickering. By an ante-nuptial agreement, dated June 11,1839, all the estate of Mrs. Pickering was transferred to Peter H. Schenck, upon certain trusts specified in the agreement. On the 8th of September, 1847, the plaintiff was substituted as trustee by an order of the supreme court, upon the resignation of Mr. Schenck.
Read the full summary
This was an action in the superior court of the city of New-York, by the plaintiff as trustee of the estate of Adeline Pickering, the wife of William L. Pickering. By an ante-nuptial agreement, dated June 11,1839, all the estate of Mrs. Pickering was transferred to Peter H. Schenck, upon certain trusts specified in the agreement. On the 8th of September, 1847, the plaintiff was substituted as trustee by an order of the supreme court, upon the resignation of Mr. Schenck. Mrs. Pickering was the owner of one share of stock in the Matteawan Company, valued at more than $1000, which on the 3d of…
1Opinion of the CourtJohnson, J.
The material question in this case is whether William L. Pickering, the husband of Adeline Pickering, is a competent witness for the plaintiff, who has brought this suit as trustee of the estate of Mrs. Pickering. Sections 398, 399 of the Code of 1849, at the time of the trial, were applicable to suits begun prior to the enactment of the Code. They are: “ No person offered as a witness shall be excluded by reason of his interest in the event of the action. The last section shall not apply to a party to the action, nor to any person for whose immediate benefit it is prosecuted or defended, nor…
2Cited by4 opinions
- Bihin v. BihinNew York Supreme Court · 1863
- Patton v. WilsonTennessee Supreme Court · 1878
- Hasbrouck v. VandervoortNew York Court of Appeals · 1853
- Hicks v. BradnerNew York Court of Appeals · 1868