Legal Opinion

Durando v. Durando

New York Supreme Court

Decided September 17, 1860Published

APPEAL from an order made at a special term, allowing a demurrer to the complaint. The action was for the partition of land of which Paul M. P. Durando died seised.

1Opinion of the Court

By the Court,

Sutherland, J.

The only material question presented by this appeal is, whether the appellant was entitled to dower in an undivided one-eighth of the real estate of which Paul M. P. Durando died seised, and in which one-eighth her husband, Peter L. P. Durando, at the time of his death, had a vested remainder in fee.

It seems perfectly settled that the appellant was not entitled to dower in such one-eighth, because her husband never had the possession, or the right of possession. His mother, under the will of his father, Paul M. P. Durando, took a life estate in all the real estate…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Bearce v. JacksonMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1808
  2. Towle v. AyerSuperior Court of New Hampshire · 1835
  3. Beekman v. HudsonNew York Supreme Court · 1838

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

Powered by the Exa API