Marsh v. Marsh
Supreme Court of Vermont
Appeal in Chancery. Heard on demurrer to the bill at the March Term, 1905, Rutland County, Pow-ers, Chancellor. Demurrer sustained, pro forma, and bill adjudged insufficient. The orators appeal. The orators have no adequate remedy at law.
Read the full summary
Appeal in Chancery. Heard on demurrer to the bill at the March Term, 1905, Rutland County, Pow-ers, Chancellor. Demurrer sustained, pro forma, and bill adjudged insufficient. The orators appeal. The orators have no adequate remedy at law. Morse et al. v. Slason et al.., 14 Vt. 296; Wade v. Pulsifer, 54 Vt. 45; Mann v. Mamin’s Est., 53 Vt. 48; Wetherbee v. Chase, 57 Vt. 253; Lindsey v. Austin, 60 Vt. 627; Wilder v. Wilder et al., 75 Vt. 178; Missionam'y Society v. Eells et al., 68 Vt. 497. The bill does not show such laches on the part of the orators as entitles defendants to have the bill…
1Opinion of the CourtMunson, J.
This bill is brought to establish and secure certain rights in the estate of Eliza E. Marsh, late of Brandon, Vt., who died intestate, leaving two sons and the two sons of a deceased daughter. The orators are Clarence R. Marsh, one of the sons, and the grandchildren. The defendants are Edward S. Marsh, the other son, E. J. Ormsbee, the admin- , istrator of Eliza Marsh’s estate, and one Post, surviving partner of Post & Elagg, a firm which is alleged to have received large amounts of the property of the deceased through the instrumentality of Edward, some of which is stated to be still in the…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Mason v. Mason's ExecutorsSupreme Court of Vermont · 1904
3Cited by2 opinions
- Woodard v. UtterIdaho Supreme Court · 1916
- Thum v. O'DeaVermont Superior Court · 2014