Herriot v. . Prime
New York Court of Appeals
Appeal from a judgment of the General Term of the Supreme Court in the second judicial department, rendered May 15, 1895, and entered November 13, 1896, upon a submission of a controversy upon facts agreed upon pursuant to sections 1279 et seq: of the Code of Civil Procedure. The facts, so far as material, are stated in the opinion. The duration of the trust created by the 1st clause of the will was extended by the codicil till the majority of the expected child.
Read the full summary
Appeal from a judgment of the General Term of the Supreme Court in the second judicial department, rendered May 15, 1895, and entered November 13, 1896, upon a submission of a controversy upon facts agreed upon pursuant to sections 1279 et seq: of the Code of Civil Procedure. The facts, so far as material, are stated in the opinion. The duration of the trust created by the 1st clause of the will was extended by the codicil till the majority of the expected child. The power to sell was annexed to the office of trustee, and continued during the duration of the trust, and could be executed by…
1Opinion of the CourtHaight, J.
The plaintiff, as sole surviving executrix and trustee under the last will and testament of Warren Herriot, deceased, entered into a contract with the defendant to convey to him a parcel of land, of which the testator died seized, and in this submission of a controversy the court is asked to determine whether the plaintiff has lawful power to convey good title thereto.
Warren Herriot was a resident of Yonkers, Westchester county. He died on the 6th day of April, 1882, leaving him surviving his widow, Sarah Louise Matilda Herriot, and one child, Ida Herriot, who was born on the 10th day of…
2Cited by2 opinions
- Park Hill Co. v. HerriotAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1899
- Yung v. BlakeAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1914