Legal Opinion

Keenan v. Tonry

Supreme Court of New Hampshire

Decided December 3, 1940No. 3195PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtPage, J.

We are urged by the appellees to sustain the rulings made below, while the executor argues that the true test of his chargeability is whether he acted in the administration of the Winthrop property in accordance with honest and reasonably prudent judgment.

No court in New Hampshire has jurisdiction to declare the appropriate law. It is true that the parties have either invoked or submitted to this jurisdiction. But if jurisdiction of the subject-matter is lacking, consent cannot confer it. Wolf Klein & Sons, Inc. v. Bronstein, ante 42, and cases cited. The rule applied here. Though a probate…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Reynolds v. StocktonSupreme Court of the United States · 1891
  2. Parsons v. . LymanNew York Court of Appeals · 1859
  3. Dawes v. BoylstonMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1812
  4. Goodwin v. JonesMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1807
  5. Merrill v. New England Mutual Life InsuranceMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1869

3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Farnsworth v. HubbardArizona Supreme Court · 1954
  2. State v. WilliamsSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1943
  3. In re the Estate of BrownOrphan's Court of Delaware · 1946

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API