Hackley v. Littell
Michigan Supreme Court
Appeal from Muskegon; Russell, J. Petition by R. Andrew Fleming, trustee, against Helen H. Littell, Eva L. Littell, W. J. Ensminger, and Morse-Ives to set aside an assignment of the income of a spendthrift trust. From a decree for petitioner, defendants. Ensminger and Ives appeal.
1Opinion of the CourtHooker, J.
In the year 1887, one Mrs. Helen A.. *107Davies, living at the time in Muskegon, Michigan, being possessed of $50,000, conveyed it to Charles H. Hackley, in trust, to collect the income and pay it to her semi-annually ; the instrument making provision for the disposition of the principal fund after her death. A more detailed statement of the terms of the trust, further than-to say that it was expressly provided that Mrs. Davies could not anticipate, transfer, or assign any part of either principal or income, is unnecessary for the purposes of' this case, especially as the assignees, Ensminger and…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Broadway National Bank v. AdamsMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1882
- Schenck v. . BarnesNew York Court of Appeals · 1898
- Pacific National Bank v. WindramMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1882
- Taylor v. ButtrickMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1896
- Warner v. RiceCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1887
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- Liberty Nat. Bank v. HicksCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1948
- Weymouth v. Delaware Trust Co.Court of Chancery of Delaware · 1946
- Gilkey v. GilkeyMichigan Supreme Court · 1910
- Commissioner of Internal Revenue v. Sarah Gilkey Vander Weele, Commissioner of Internal Revenue v. Frederick Vander WeeleCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1958
- Liberty Nat. Bank v. HicksCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1948