Legal Opinion

Brown v. Richter

New York Supreme Court

Decided March 16, 1894PublishedCited by 6 opinions

Action by Caroline L. Brown and others against Charles J. Richter, as executor, and another, to declare the will of James W. Lawrence, deceased, void, as unlawfully suspending the absolute ownership of personal property. An interlocutory judgment was entered in favor of plaintiffs, and defendants move for a new trial on a case and exceptions. Reversed.

1Opinion of the CourtVan Brunt, P. J.

This action was brought by the children of James W. Lawrence, deceased, against the executor of the will of James W. Lawrence, and Helen Or. Lawrence, the infant daughter of the plaintiff, James B. Lawrence, for a judgment declaring that the will of said James W. Lawrence is void, as unlawfully suspending the absolute ownership of personal property, and for an accounting by the executor, and distribution of the property among the plaintiffs. Judgment having been rendered in favor of the plaintiffs, and an interlocutory judgment entered, this motion for a new trial is made under section 1001…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Tilden v. . GreenNew York Court of Appeals · 1891
  2. Schettler v. . SmithNew York Court of Appeals · 1869
  3. Cross v. United States Trust Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1892
  4. Kennedy v. . HoyNew York Court of Appeals · 1887

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. Brown v. RichterAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1898
  2. Clark v. ClarkNew York Supreme Court · 1898
  3. Dennison v. LawrenceNew York Supreme Court · 1899
  4. Brown v. RichterNew York Supreme Court · 1897
  5. Finch v. WilkesNew York Supreme Court · 1896

1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API