Goddard v. Pomeroy
New York Supreme Court
CONTROVERSY submitted to the court, by agreement of the parties, without suit, as authorized by the code. The following are the facts upon which the claim, and the rights of the parties, depended.
Read the full summary
CONTROVERSY submitted to the court, by agreement of the parties, without suit, as authorized by the code. The following are the facts upon which the claim, and the rights of the parties, depended. On or about the 18th day of February, 1836, Josiah Groddard, of the town of York, in the county of Livingston, made and executed his last will and testament, by which (after omitting the formal introduction) he devised and directed as follows: “ After my doctor’s bills, funeral expenses, and the cost of a decent monument erected at my grave is paid, and other honest debts, if any there be unsettled,…
1Opinion of the Court
By the Court,
Johnson, J.
All the personal estate of the testator, as the case shows, has been applied in payment of the legacies given by the will. The Baptist church mentioned in the will, therefore, if it can take at all, takes only the real estate. And it must be deemed to take it under and by virtue of the devise, as real estate. This church or society is a religious corporation duly organized under the act of 1813. By the revised statutes (2 R. S. 57, § 3) it is declared that “.no devise to a corporation shall be valid unless such corporation be expressly authorized by its charter or by…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Tract v. TracyNew York Supreme Court · 1852
- King v. RundleNew York Supreme Court · 1853
- Theological Seminary v. Childs & StebbinsNew York Court of Chancery · 1834
3Cited by15 opinions
- Bevan v. . CooperNew York Court of Appeals · 1878
- Hoyt v. . HoytNew York Court of Appeals · 1881
- Thurber v. . ChambersNew York Court of Appeals · 1876
- Reid v. CorriganIllinois Supreme Court · 1892
- In re the Estate of LilienthalNew York Surrogate's Court · 1930
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.