Rose v. Rose
New York Supreme Court
Motion", by the plaintiff, to set aside the report of a referee, by which it was found that there was nothing due from the defendants, as executors of Stephen Rose, deceased, to the plaintiff. The facts are sufficiently detailed in the opinion of the court.
1Opinion of the Court
By the Court, Gridley, J.
This is a suit for labor and services, brought by a son against the representatives of his lather. The ground of defense mainly relied on by the defendants’ counsel is, that the demand has been satisfied by the devise of a farm, and an acceptance of it in satisfaction. The clause in the will upon which this question arises, is the following : “ Firstly, my son, Marvin Rose, has labored for me a number of years since he became twenty-one years of age, and in consideration of such labor I set off and devise to him, the said Marvin Rose, his heirs and assigns, the…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- M'Crea v. PurmortCourt for the Trial of Impeachments and Correction of Errors · 1836
- Jackson ex dem. Anderson v. AndersonNew York Supreme Court · 1830
- Maigley v. HauerNew York Supreme Court · 1811
3Cited by4 opinions
- Stevens v. HatchSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1861
- Buszozak v. WoloNew York Supreme Court · 1925
- Alerding v. AllisonIndiana Court of Appeals · 1903
- Bettinger v. Van AlstyneNew York Supreme Court · 1894