De Freest v. Bloomingdale
New York Supreme Court
Motion to set aside the report of.a sole referee. The action was assumpsit, brought to recover for the support of Mary De Freest, the widow of Derick J. De Freest, deceased. It appeared that D. J'. De Freest, who died about 1832, had devised a farm to the plaintiff and N. De Freest, who were his sons, charged with and subject to the support of his widow.
Read the full summary
Motion to set aside the report of.a sole referee. The action was assumpsit, brought to recover for the support of Mary De Freest, the widow of Derick J. De Freest, deceased. It appeared that D. J'. De Freest, who died about 1832, had devised a farm to the plaintiff and N. De Freest, who were his sons, charged with and subject to the support of his widow. In 1835 N. De Freest conveyed his half of the farm to Philip De Freest, the defendant’s testator, subject to the equal one-half of the support of the widow De Freest. She lived with and was supported by the plaintiff, and there was evidence…
1Opinion of the Court
By the Court, Beardsley, Ch. J.
As-the referee allowed the plaintiff for..more than seven years’ board of the widow De Freest, and there was no pretence of a right to recover for .such board after January, 1843, the time for which the allowance .was made must have commenced as early as 1836. This was some three years before the plaintiff gave his promissory note to the defendants’, testator for §100 and interest. It does not appear what this note,was given for, .and, unexplained, the giving of the note was prima facie evidence that nothing remained due to' the maker.of the note from the.person…
2Cited by21 opinions
- In Re the Judicial Settlement of the Accounts of CallisterNew York Court of Appeals · 1897
- Brock v. BarnesNew York Supreme Court · 1863
- Lake v. TysenNew York Court of Appeals · 1852
- Hart v. HartNew York Supreme Court · 1856
- Sarraille v. CalmonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1904
16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.