Wagstaff v. Marcy
New York Supreme Court
On March. 5, 1897, William E. Parsons, as owner of one-sixth, joined with the other owners of the remaining five-sixths, in an agreement to convey to one Walker, the fee of premises Eo. 8 Barclay street, this city. Walker, the vendee, transferred his rights under the contract to Joseph Meeks. The owners of the five-sixths performed their part of the contract by conveying their title to Meeks, the assignee of the vendee.
Read the full summary
On March. 5, 1897, William E. Parsons, as owner of one-sixth, joined with the other owners of the remaining five-sixths, in an agreement to convey to one Walker, the fee of premises Eo. 8 Barclay street, this city. Walker, the vendee, transferred his rights under the contract to Joseph Meeks. The owners of the five-sixths performed their part of the contract by conveying their title to Meeks, the assignee of the vendee. Before the time came for delivering the deed, to-wit: April 11, 1897, William E. Parsons died, leaving a will dated December 3, 1896, which was duly probated as a will of real…
1Opinion of the CourtMcAdam, J.
The suit in form for partition of real property has for its ultimate purpose the avoidance of the will of William E. Parsons, for want of testamentary capacity, so that the proceeds of the sale he contracted to make prior to his death may be distributed among his heirs-at-law as though there had been no will. Pryer v. Howe, 40 Hun, 383. The judgment attainable by the plaintiff under the peculiar circumstances of this case can be no other than a finding that the will is void; that .the proceeds of sale may be divided among the heirs. This is allowable, because a plaintiff is entitled to any…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Bell v. . MerrifieldNew York Court of Appeals · 1888
- Williams v. . HaddockNew York Court of Appeals · 1895
- Ostrander v. . HartNew York Court of Appeals · 1892
- Smith v. HiltonNew York Supreme Court · 1888
- Moore v. BurrowsNew York Supreme Court · 1861
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by8 opinions
- In Re Estate of DwyerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1911
- Lumbermen's Mutual Casualty Co. v. BissellMichigan Supreme Court · 1922
- Shure v. DahlNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1957
- In re the Estate of AshbackNew York Surrogate's Court · 1918
- In re the Estate of CallNew York Surrogate's Court · 1970
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.