Wheeler v. Walker
Supreme Court of Connecticut
THIS was an action of ejectment, for one undivided fourth pai'-f of a piece of land in Trumbull, containing about fifty-two acres, The case was as follows. Eliakim Walker, being seised of the demanded premises, made his will, on the 29th of .Time 1812, and died in the month of December following.
Read the full summary
THIS was an action of ejectment, for one undivided fourth pai'-f of a piece of land in Trumbull, containing about fifty-two acres, The case was as follows. Eliakim Walker, being seised of the demanded premises, made his will, on the 29th of .Time 1812, and died in the month of December following. One clause of the will was in these words: « As to the rest and residue of my estate, both real and personal, together with my wearing apparel, I give, and bequeath the same to my two sons, David and Nathan Nichols, to be equally divided between them, in quantity and quality, they jointly and…
1Opinion of the Court
Swift, Ch. J.
The question is, whether this is an absolute devise of the lands to the sons, and a legacy to each of the daughters ; or whether it is a devise on condition that the sons pay to each of the daughters three hundred dollars. The word “ paying,” according to all the authorities, clcarh *200Imports a condition. There is no ^ift or legacy to the daughters. No right is created in their favour, by the will; nor are any words used, which can be construed to imply such intent. It is, then, a conditional devise. The devisor has given the land to his sons, on condition that they pay three…
2Cited by21 opinions
- Blanchard v. Detroit, Lansing & Lake Michigan RailroadMichigan Supreme Court · 1875
- Lindsey v. LindseyIndiana Supreme Court · 1874
- Bethea v. McCulloughSupreme Court of Alabama · 1915
- State v. ShippeySupreme Court of Minnesota · 1865
- Brittain v. TaylorSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1915
16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.