Miller v. Lerch
Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit
Peter Miller of Easton, devised an estate of about $300,000 to two church corporations of that town, upon certain trusts which his heir at law, the present plaintiff, contended were void, but which the corporations asserted were charitable uses, and as such entitled to the protection given to that class of gifts. A large part of the devise was real estate, which the present action-one of ejectment — was brought to recover.
Read the full summary
Peter Miller of Easton, devised an estate of about $300,000 to two church corporations of that town, upon certain trusts which his heir at law, the present plaintiff, contended were void, but which the corporations asserted were charitable uses, and as such entitled to the protection given to that class of gifts. A large part of the devise was real estate, which the present action-one of ejectment — was brought to recover. The question was, whether admitting the trusts to be void,' the plaintiff had such a legal title as would enable him to recover here in ejectment In other words, whether…
1Opinion of the Court
GRIER, Circuit Justice.
In England, under the statute of 9 Geo. II. c, 36,2 when lands are devised to a charity, the trust not only is itself void, but it vitiates the devise of the legal estate on which it was engraft-ed. And therefore in such cases the heir may recover at law, except where there are other trusts not charitable, which, of course, would entitle the trustees to retain the estate, and oblige the heir to prosecute his claim in equity. Jarm. Wills, 200. But this statute, which is usually, though rather inaccurately, called the “statute of mortmain,” was never adopted in…
2Cited by1 opinion
- De Camp v. DobbinsSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1879