Legal Opinion

Bolster v. Attorney General

Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court

Decided June 27, 1940PublishedCited by 29 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtLummus, J.

The trustees under the will of Henry O. Peabody petitioned for instructions as to their duty with respect to a fund of about $750,000 in their hands, being the residue of the estate, which was given by the will “to found and endow an Institution to be called the ‘Henry O. Peabody School for Girls/ for the purpose of furnishing instruction to girls by teaching the various branches of art, science and industry best calculated to enable the scholars to acquire an independent livelihood.” The will *388provided that the school be located upon a farm owned by the testator, if owned by him at his death.…

2Cases cited22 opinions

  1. Securities & Exchange Commission v. United States Realty & Improvement Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1940
  2. Carilli v. HerseyMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1939
  3. Burbank v. BurbankMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1890
  4. Dillaway v. BurtonMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1926
  5. Jenkins v. JenkinsMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1939

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

3Cited by29 opinions

  1. Lowell Bar Ass'n v. LoebMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1943
  2. Watkins v. Simplex Time Recorder Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1944
  3. City of Newton v. Department of Public UtilitiesMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1959
  4. Waterbury Trust Co. v. PorterSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1944
  5. Ames v. Attorney GeneralMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1955

24 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