Legal Opinion

Lord v. Lord

Supreme Court of Connecticut

Decided July 15, 1854PublishedCited by 28 opinions

The claims, of the parties in the above entitled cause, as to the manner in which the personal estate of William M. Lord, deceased, should contribute to the payment of such debts as were not provided for by the property specifically appropriated for that purpose, having been reserved by this court, (see 22 Conn.

Read the full summary

The claims, of the parties in the above entitled cause, as to the manner in which the personal estate of William M. Lord, deceased, should contribute to the payment of such debts as were not provided for by the property specifically appropriated for that purpose, having been reserved by this court, (see 22 Conn. R., 595,) for further argument, that question was argued at the term of this court, holden at Norwich, in July, 1854. The prefatory clause of said will was as follows: • “In the name of God, Amen, I,'William M. Lord, of Lyme, in the county of New London, and state of Connecticut,…

1Opinion of the CourtEllsworth, J.

When this case was before us, last year, we left the point now in dispute, for a more full and thorough argument. That argument we have now heard, and we are now ready to declare that the law in fact is what we then intimated it might be.

All the books agree, that a devise or legacy given to the widow in lieu of dower, is not to be required to contribute with other legacies, to the payment of debts due from the estate. Hubbard & al. v. Hubbard & al., 6 Met., 50. Williamson v. Williamson, 6 Paige, 305. 6 Gill, 120. Amb., 245. 1 Rep. on Leg., 298. 1 Russell, 543. The widow is considered in the…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Williamson v. WilliamsonNew York Court of Chancery · 1837
  2. Buchanan v. PueCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1847

3Cited by28 opinions

  1. Steele v. Steele's Adm'rSupreme Court of Alabama · 1879
  2. Allen v. BrandeisCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1928
  3. Overton v. LeaTennessee Supreme Court · 1902
  4. In re the Estate of GotzianSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1885
  5. A. & N. Railroad v. BaileyNebraska Supreme Court · 1881

23 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API