Hillyard v. Miller
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
In error from the Common Pleas of Northampton. This was an ejectment by the heir of Peter Miller, for a piece of land forming part of his residuary estate. The question was, whether the devise was void ? The defendants were the tenant in possession, the executors of the devisor, and two incorporated religious societies, who were devisees in trust of the said residue.
Read the full summary
In error from the Common Pleas of Northampton. This was an ejectment by the heir of Peter Miller, for a piece of land forming part of his residuary estate. The question was, whether the devise was void ? The defendants were the tenant in possession, the executors of the devisor, and two incorporated religious societies, who were devisees in trust of the said residue. The will was dated Sept. 9th, 1846. The testator died in March, 1847. The testator bequeathed to “ the contributors of the Female Benevolent Societies of the German Reformed and St. Johns’ Lutheran congregations of the borough of…
1Opinion of the CourtGibson, C. J.
Trusts for accumulation of income, are as rigidly restricted by the ride against perpetuities, as legal estates. In the Duke of Norfolk v. Howard, 1 Vern. 164, Lord Keeper Guilford said, “all men are desirous to continue'their estates in *334their families; and if they could come nearer to a perpetuity in equity, than the rules of law would admit, they would settle their estates by way of trust, which might benefit the court, but would be destructive of the commonwealth.” In subsequent cases, such trusts have been frequent subjects of litigation in equity. It was the indestructibility, not only…
2Cited by16 opinions
- Newlin EstateSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1951
- Appeal of CogginsSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1889
- Lockhart's EstateSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1932
- Whitman's EstateSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1915
- Ledwith v. HurstSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1925
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.