Legal Opinion

Geoffroy v. Schmidt

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

Decided March 3, 1952PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

There was neither limitation of time nor expressed contingency which might terminate the agreement not to seek partition and it was, therefore, against public policy in that the power to alienate was suspended for an unreasonable time. (Haeussler v. Missouri Iron Co., 110 Mo. 188; Shelby v. Shelby, 192 Ky. 304; 68 C. J. S., Partition, § 44, pp. 67-68.) Johnston, Adel, Wenzel and MacCrate, JJ., concur; Carswell, Acting P. J., concurs in result. [See post, p. 1010.]

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Haeussler v. Missouri Iron Co.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1892
  2. Shelby v. ShelbyCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1921

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Albin v. AlbinNew York Supreme Court · 1960
  2. Tramontano v. CatalanoAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1965
  3. Leonardo v. LeonardoAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2002
  4. Levy v. HersonNew York Supreme Court · 1985