Shaver v. Radley
New York Court of Chancery
THE origina^ bill, filed March 8th, 1799, stated, that Andrew Makaus ++ was seized of eighty acres of land in the Van Baal patent, in the manor of Rensselaer. That A. M., by his will, dated August 15th, 17.49, devised one half of his land to his son Peter, in fee, and the other half to his daughter Annatie. The testator died, and his son, also, died, soon after.
Read the full summary
THE origina^ bill, filed March 8th, 1799, stated, that Andrew Makaus ++ was seized of eighty acres of land in the Van Baal patent, in the manor of Rensselaer. That A. M., by his will, dated August 15th, 17.49, devised one half of his land to his son Peter, in fee, and the other half to his daughter Annatie. The testator died, and his son, also, died, soon after. Annatie married John Radley, and their children, and the children of another daughter, Maritie, who married Abraham Bradt, were plaintiffs. Elizabeth, another daughter of the testator, died intestate. A dispute arose about the…
1Opinion of the Court
The Chancelllor.
1. If the land in question had belonged to the Wan Baal patent, and not to the manor of Rensselaer, and Jlndrew Makaus had been legally seized in fee, at the time of his death, the plaintiffs, who are chil*313dren of Annatie Radley, would have shown a title to a moiety of the premises.
By the will of Makanse, (and of the authenticity of which there can remain, no doubt,) the one half of the farm was devised to his son Peter, and the other half to his daughter Annatie. There is no evidence that Annatie ever parted with her right, but there is ground to presume that Peter conveyed…
2Cited by2 opinions
- Carris v. CarrisSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1873
- Hunter v. MarlboroU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Massachusetts · 1846