De Peyster v. Clendining
New York Court of Chancery
The bill in this cause was filed by F. De Peyster, the administrator with the will annexed of J. Clendining, deceased, to obtain a judicial construction of the will of the decedent. The testator resided in the city of New-York, and made his will in 1829, and died in January, 1836, possessed of a considerable real and personal estate.
Read the full summary
The bill in this cause was filed by F. De Peyster, the administrator with the will annexed of J. Clendining, deceased, to obtain a judicial construction of the will of the decedent. The testator resided in the city of New-York, and made his will in 1829, and died in January, 1836, possessed of a considerable real and personal estate. He left a widow', and two sons and four daughters, to wit: John and James, Sarah, the wife of William Hogan, Margaret, the wife of H. Bulkley, Letitia, who married Stuart J. Molían, and Jane; who were his only children and heirs at law. By his will, after…
1Opinion of the Court
The Chancellor.
There can be no possible doubt as to the validity of the devise of the Sharon farm to the widow for life, provided she elects to reside there so long. If the law had continued as it was when the will was made, in 1829, the legal estate would have vested in the trustees; but they would have held that legal estate, during the time Mrs. Clendining continued to reside upon the farm, as a mere naked trust, for her use. Such a trust is now, by virtue of the 47th section of the article of the revised statutes relative to uses and trusts, (1 R. S. 727,) turned into a legal estate in…
2Cited by65 opinions
- Manice v. . ManiceNew York Court of Appeals · 1871
- Cochrane v. . SchellNew York Court of Appeals · 1894
- Post v. . HoverNew York Court of Appeals · 1865
- Byrnes v. . StilwellNew York Court of Appeals · 1886
- Noel v. EwingIndiana Supreme Court · 1857
60 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.