Epstein v. Corning
Supreme Court of New Hampshire
1Opinion of the CourtMarble, J.
The defendants’ contention that the testatrix intended that any share of the estate which her granddaughters might receive by reason of Arthur’s failure to return from France should become a part of the fund to be held in trust for them is not borne out by the language of the will. It is there stated clearly and without qualification that Arthur’s share in the event of his failure to return within five years shall be divided equally among the heirs of the testatrix. Legal title to one-fourth of that share vested in Doris as one of the four heirs. Her power to convey that fourth cannot be…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Smith v. FurbishSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1894
- Brahmey v. RollinsSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1935
- Eaton v. EatonSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1924
- Hanford v. ClancySupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1936
- Flanders v. ParkerSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1923
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- County National Bank & Trust Co. v. SheppardCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1955
- Granite State Electric Co. v. GidleySupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1974
- Seattle First National Bank v. CrosbyWashington Supreme Court · 1953