Van Tassel v. Burger
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
Submissiow of a controversy upon an agreed statement of facts, pursuant to section 1279 of the Code of Civil Procedure.
1Concurrence
Miller, J:
(concurring) :
1 concur in the conclusion reached by my brother Hooker. The question to be .determined is whether the devise to James Baynes was revoked by the subsequent contract to convey the property ■ devised and by the delivery of .the deed in escrow. "The effect off the agreement to convey Was to convert the testatrix’s property from- real estate to personalty. (Williams v. Haddock, 145 N. Y. 144.) At common law either the agreement to convey or the delivery of the deed in escrow w'.ould have revoked the specific devise," (Walton v. Walton, 7 Johns. Ch. 258 ; Adams v. Winne, 7…
2Cases cited17 opinions
- Wheelwright v. WheelwrightMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1807
- Jackson ex dem. Russell v. RowlandNew York Supreme Court · 1831
- Frost v. BeekmanNew York Court of Chancery · 1814
- Williams v. . HaddockNew York Court of Appeals · 1895
- Langdon v. . Astor's ExecutorsNew York Court of Appeals · 1857
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.