Legal Opinion

Huntress v. Hanley

Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court

Decided April 22, 1907PublishedCited by 23 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtRugg, J.

The plaintiffs are trustees under the will of Patrick T. Hanley late of Boston. They bring this bill of inter-*237pleader for instructions as to the persons to whom to pay a portion of the residuum held under the terms of that will. Paragraph Qi) of clause tenth of the will * authorized the trustees to terminate the trust therein created as to the share of any of the beneficiaries, and the plaintiffs have exercised that power by terminating the trust so far as it relates to the interests of Dudley P. Hanley. Mary A. Hanley claims this entire share by virtue of an assignment dated April 18,1899.…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. Matthews v. ThompsonMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1904
  2. Hart v. BrierleyMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1905
  3. Tracy v. LincolnMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1887
  4. French v. PetersMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1901
  5. Haskell v. MerrillMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1901

5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by23 opinions

  1. Boston & Albany Railroad v. ReardonMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1917
  2. Richards v. ForrestMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1932
  3. Stevens v. Rockport Granite Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1914
  4. Noble v. Mead-Morrison Manufacturing Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1921
  5. Nelson v. J. H. Winchell & Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1909

18 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API