Arthur v. Arthur
New York Supreme Court
In EauiTY. The facts in this case are briefly these: Joshua . Arthur being possessed of real and personal estate, made his will on the 3d day of February, 1844, which was duly proved before the surrogate, on the application of three of the complainants, who were named as executors. He ordered his executors, thereinafter named, to pay all his debts and funeral expenses.
Read the full summary
In EauiTY. The facts in this case are briefly these: Joshua . Arthur being possessed of real and personal estate, made his will on the 3d day of February, 1844, which was duly proved before the surrogate, on the application of three of the complainants, who were named as executors. He ordered his executors, thereinafter named, to pay all his debts and funeral expenses. He then gave all the rest and residue of his real and personal estate, wherever situated, to his five sons, three daughters and a grandson, son of a deceased daughter, their heirs and assigns forever, as tenants in common, in…
1Opinion of the CourtHand, J.
This cause has been very fully and ably argued, and I have given it much attention. It is clear to my mind, disregarding all objections to the nature of the evidence, that the testator at, and at all times after the publication of his will, intended to make a distribution of his property in strict conformity to its terms. I can not give any force to the testimony in relation to the casual remarks said to have been made by the testator, that he was rewarding or paying the defendant for his care or labor. It pretty clearly appears that the defendant, after his marriage, had been assisted by the…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- Hunt v. RhodesSupreme Court of the United States · 1828
- M'Crea v. PurmortCourt for the Trial of Impeachments and Correction of Errors · 1836
- Hawley & King v. JamesNew York Court of Chancery · 1835
- Pond v. BerghNew York Court of Chancery · 1843
- Jackson ex dem. Coe v. KniffenNew York Supreme Court · 1806
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by35 opinions
- Lockbihler v. YoungCalifornia Supreme Court · 1899
- Memphis &. Charleston R. R. v. WhitfieldMississippi Supreme Court · 1870
- Hodge v. JonesCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1994
- Martin v. HamlinMichigan Supreme Court · 1869
- Donatelli v. MitchellCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1993
30 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.