Mayor of Philadelphia v. Elliott
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
In this cause, a verdict was, by agreement of the parties, rendered for the plaintiffs, for the sum of one hundred thousand dollars, subject to the opinion of the court, whether upon the evidence, the plaintiffs were entitled to recover a residuary bequest contained in the will of James Wills, deceased.
Read the full summary
In this cause, a verdict was, by agreement of the parties, rendered for the plaintiffs, for the sum of one hundred thousand dollars, subject to the opinion of the court, whether upon the evidence, the plaintiffs were entitled to recover a residuary bequest contained in the will of James Wills, deceased. If the opinion of the court should be in favour of the plaintiffs, the judgment to be entered on the verdict, was by the agreement, to be released on the defendants’ transferring to the plaintiffs certain stocks therein specified. The agreement contained other provisions, which it is…
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the court was delivered
Per Curiam :
Although the property involved in the event be immense, the question is without difficulty, the principal point having been determined in Witman v. Lex. The difference attempted here, depends on a supposed want of capacity in the plaintiff to act as a trustee for purposes foreign to the object of its incorporation. How far we might be disposed to disregard an objection depending on technical reasons, in consequence of being without the extraordinary powers of a chancellor, to prevent a trust from failing of effect for want of a trustee, it, is…
2Cited by12 opinions
- Philadelphia v. FoxSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1870
- Goodman AppealSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1967
- Grimes' Executors v. HarmonIndiana Supreme Court · 1871
- Williams v. PearsonSupreme Court of Alabama · 1862
- Domestic & Foreign Missionary Society's AppealSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1858
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.