Sherman v. Burnham
New York Supreme Court
In Euuity. This was an appeal, by the plaintiffs, from an order of the Hon. A. L. Robertson, late assistant vice chancellor of the first circuit. The bill alledged that Michael Burnham, late of the city of New-York, departed this life on the 19 th of January, 1836, seised and possessed of considerable real and personal estate, leaving his last will and testament, duly executed, so as to pass real estate.
Read the full summary
In Euuity. This was an appeal, by the plaintiffs, from an order of the Hon. A. L. Robertson, late assistant vice chancellor of the first circuit. The bill alledged that Michael Burnham, late of the city of New-York, departed this life on the 19 th of January, 1836, seised and possessed of considerable real and personal estate, leaving his last will and testament, duly executed, so as to pass real estate. That by such last will the testator gave and devised unto his sons Warren S., Henry and Charles, all his real estate in trust, after the death of the' testator’s wife, to sell and dispose of…
1Opinion of the Court
By the Court, Edmonds, J.
Mrs. Sherman has an interest in her father’s estate: 1. As cestui que trust of a share devised to her use for life, with remainder to her issue, the income payable to her, irrespective of her husband. 2. As purchaser in fee of a portion of Michael B.’s share: and 3. The bill claims that under that purchase she acquired her brother Michael’s share in the portions of her brothers Charles and Thomas. This last claim is denied by the answers: Michael insisting that his interest in Charles’ and Thomas’ portions did not pass by his conveyance; but the two first statements…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Grant v. SchoonhovenNew York Court of Chancery · 1841
3Cited by4 opinions
- Brownson v. GiffordNew York Supreme Court · 1852
- Ackley v. TarboxNew York Supreme Court · 1859
- Ackley v. . TarboxNew York Court of Appeals · 1864
- Howland v. Fort Edward Paper Mill Co.New York Supreme Court · 1853