Legal Opinion
Lovejoy v. Bucknam
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
Decided February 11, 1938PublishedCited by 8 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtCox, J.
Charles H. Newhall died in 1908, leaving a will which, as affected by a compromise agreement, was admitted to probate. Hastings v. Nesmith, 188 Mass. 190, 194. Ellis v. Hunt, 228 Mass. 39. By its terms the residue of his estate was given to trustees “to hold . . . until the death of the last survivor of . . . my sister, Sarah C. Berry, and her sons, Henry N. Berry and Benjamin H. Berry,” with provisions for payment of the net income, “during the continuance of the trust,” to the sister and sons, “the issue of either [son] that may die before the termination of the trust to take the parent’s…
2Cases cited20 opinions
- Clarke v. FayMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1910
- Greenough v. OsgoodMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1920
- Stone v. ForbesMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1905
- Ellis v. HuntMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1917
- Hill v. Treasurer & Receiver GeneralMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1918
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by8 opinions
- Beit v. PROBATE & FAMILY COURT DEPARTMENTMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1982
- Ferguson v. Commissioner of Corporations & TaxationMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1944
- State Street Trust Co. v. KisselMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1939
- Welch v. MorseMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1948
- Budin v. LevyMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1962
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.