Legal Opinion · Dissent

Troutman v. DeBoissiere Odd Fellows' Orphans' Home & Industrial School Ass'n

Supreme Court of Kansas

Decided January 10, 1903No. 11,822Published

Error from Franklin district court; Samuel A. Riggs, judge.

1DissentCunningham, J.

(dissenting) : The deed in question is not obnoxious to the .rule against perpetuities, because, first, the rule is not what the majority assume it to be, one against the perpetual vesting of title, but rather one against the unlawful or unreasonable postponement of the vesting of title ; and, second, if the rule against perpetuities were such as the majority assume it to be, the deed in question would not violate it because it conveys an absolute estate in fee simple, without limitation or condition serving to prevent alienation at any time.

The majority of the court base their opinion on an…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Harrington v. PierWisconsin Supreme Court · 1900
  2. Edgerly v. BarkerSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1891
  3. Dean v. MumfordMichigan Supreme Court · 1894
  4. Saxton v. WebberWisconsin Supreme Court · 1892
  5. Stansbury v. HubnerCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1890

3 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