Hill v. Fiske
New York Supreme Court
Action to enforce specific performance of an agreement alleged to have been made by one Mary A. Sewell in her lifetime to leave all her property to the plaintiff, and also for services alleged to have been rendered by the plaintiff to the said Mary A. Sewell. All the defendants, other than the administrator of the said Mary A. Sewell, are persons alleged to claim some interest in her property or estate.
Read the full summary
Action to enforce specific performance of an agreement alleged to have been made by one Mary A. Sewell in her lifetime to leave all her property to the plaintiff, and also for services alleged to have been rendered by the plaintiff to the said Mary A. Sewell. All the defendants, other than the administrator of the said Mary A. Sewell, are persons alleged to claim some interest in her property or estate. The defendant Sarah J. R Fiske, as executrix of Thomas S. Eyder, interposed an answer, containing a counterclaim whereby she claimed to be entitled to the whole residuary estate of Mary A.…
1Opinion of the CourtPutnam, J.
This action was brought by plaintiff for the specific performance of an alleged contract made by one Mary A. Sewell to leave to the plaintiff all her property, and also on a claim for .services alleged to have been rendered by the plaintiff to the said Mary A. Sewell in the latter’s lifetime.
The will of Mary A. Sewell, dated March 13, 1905, after devising certain specific articles of jewelry, personal ornaments and wearing apparel and directing the executor to purchase a suitable burial plot and monument, contained this provision: “ The balance of my estate to be distributed by executor in…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Trustees of Amherst College v. RitchNew York Court of Appeals · 1897
- Dunning v. . Ocean National BankNew York Court of Appeals · 1875
- In Re the Judicial Settlement of the Account of MoehringNew York Court of Appeals · 1897
- Kinnier v. . RogersNew York Court of Appeals · 1870
- Gross v. MooreNew York Supreme Court · 1893
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by7 opinions
- In Re Lidston's EstateWashington Supreme Court · 1949
- Townsend v. GordonMichigan Supreme Court · 1944
- Gilman v. GilmanSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1923
- Will of DeverWisconsin Supreme Court · 1921
- Harvey v. GriggsCourt of Chancery of Delaware · 1920
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.