Chinn v. Keith
New York Supreme Court
Appeal from an order of the Special Term denying a motion to confirm the report of a referee. The action was brought by Belle E. Chinn against Ellen H. Keith, Gilbert Shader and others, for the partition of certain lands situated in Wyoming county, of which one Arabella Baldwin died seized.
Read the full summary
Appeal from an order of the Special Term denying a motion to confirm the report of a referee. The action was brought by Belle E. Chinn against Ellen H. Keith, Gilbert Shader and others, for the partition of certain lands situated in Wyoming county, of which one Arabella Baldwin died seized. By her last will and testament she devised the lands described in the complaint to her daughter, Ellen H. Keith, who is one of the defendants, to have and to hold the same during her natural life and, after her death, to the heirs of the body of the said Ellen H. Keith, whom she shall leave her surviving.…
1Opinion of the CourtGilbert, J.
If the decision of the court of appeals in Moore v. Littel, 41 N. Y. 76, is to be taken as a correct exposition of the law, the devise in this case to “the heirs of the body of Mrs. Keith whom she shall leave her surviving,” created a vested remainder in fee in the present plaintiff and her brothers and sisters. No sensible distinction on this point can be drawn between the two cases. Such remainder is liable to open and let in after born children of Mrs. Keith, and is liable also, in respect to the share of any child now living, to be defeated by his or her death before the death of Mrs.…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Mead v. . MitchellNew York Court of Appeals · 1858
- Howell v. . MillsNew York Court of Appeals · 1873
- Smith v. SmithNew York Court of Chancery · 1843
- Brevoort v. . GraceNew York Court of Appeals · 1873
- Van Arsdale v. DrakeNew York Supreme Court · 1848
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.