Morehouse v. Cotheal
Supreme Court of New Jersey
This was an action of waste. The title of the demandants, as set out in their count, will be found substantially stated in the report of the case, when previously before this court. (1 Zab. 480.) The demandants claimed to have a vested remainder in the premises in question, under the will of Elizabeth Wilmurt.
Read the full summary
This was an action of waste. The title of the demandants, as set out in their count, will be found substantially stated in the report of the case, when previously before this court. (1 Zab. 480.) The demandants claimed to have a vested remainder in the premises in question, under the will of Elizabeth Wilmurt. As stated in the count, she devised the premises to her daughter, Elizabeth Ann Wilmurt, and her heirs for ever, and, by the same will, she further gave to S. A. R. and E. W. H., and their heirs, &c., for ever, the reversion of the same lands, &c., in case her daughter, S. A. W., should…
1Opinion of the CourtCarpenter, J.
As I take the plea to be defective in substance, it is unnecessary to advert to any supposed defect in its form. The plea more fully sets out the devise, the substance of which only is stated in the count, and the argument of the counsel of the defendants has been directed to the object'of showing that the title of the plaintiffs is not such as will support this action. The case, upon the argument, has been made to turn entirely upon the question, whether the limitation over depends upon a definite or an indefinite failure of issue. In the one case the result would be an estate tail in the…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Ide v. IdeMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1809
- Osborne v. ShrieveU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Rhode Island · 1824