Reed v. Reed
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
This was a petition for partition of certain lands, in which the petitioners each claim to be seised in common and undivided of one seventh part, with other persons to them unknown. Upon general notice having been given in manner required by law, Samuel Reed came in, claimed to be sole seised during the life of Hannah Reed, and traversed the seisin of the petitioners.
Read the full summary
This was a petition for partition of certain lands, in which the petitioners each claim to be seised in common and undivided of one seventh part, with other persons to them unknown. Upon general notice having been given in manner required by law, Samuel Reed came in, claimed to be sole seised during the life of Hannah Reed, and traversed the seisin of the petitioners. The parties then agreed, in a case stated, that Samuel Reed, late of Littleton, deceased, was seised of the premises in question, and, being so seised, made his last will and testament, in which, after expressing his intention…
1Opinion of the Court
By the Court.
The devise is direct to the widow. A devise of the income of lands is the same in its effect as a devise of the lands. The petitioners have, however, mistaken their rights. During the life of their mother, they are entitled to no more than two seventh parts of two thirds of the land described in their petition.
Curia.
Let the widow’s appearance be entered; and let the petitioners alter their petition as moved for.
As to the question of costs referred to us by the parties, the provincial statute giving this process (3) made no provision for costs in any case; and. the statute now in…
2Cited by29 opinions
- Pollock v. Farmers' Loan & Trust Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1895
- Scott v. WestWisconsin Supreme Court · 1885
- Paxton v. Benedum-Trees Oil Co.West Virginia Supreme Court · 1917
- Mott v. . RichtmyerNew York Court of Appeals · 1874
- Greene v. WilburSupreme Court of Rhode Island · 1886
24 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.