Hackett v. Hackett
Supreme Court of New Hampshire
Bill in Equity, for specific performance. Facts found by the court. William H. Y. Hackett devised real estate in Gilmanton and Belmont, and the debt due him from his brother, Charles A. Hackett, to his two sons, in trust, to be used as they might judge best for the benefit of his brother and his wife and children, with authority “ to sell, allow him to occupy, or to convey a fee simple to him or his children,” as his sons, knowing the object of the testator, might from time…
Read the full summary
Bill in Equity, for specific performance. Facts found by the court. William H. Y. Hackett devised real estate in Gilmanton and Belmont, and the debt due him from his brother, Charles A. Hackett, to his two sons, in trust, to be used as they might judge best for the benefit of his brother and his wife and children, with authority “ to sell, allow him to occupy, or to convey a fee simple to him or his children,” as his sons, knowing the object of the testator, might from time to time judge would best promote the comfort of his brother and his wife and children; or to rent the same, and from…
1Opinion of the CourtSmith, J.
Did the codicil revoke the power given the trustees in the will to sell the land or to convey it to Charles A. Hackett ? The purpose of the testator in the codicil was to prefer Joseph to the other children, as the child for whom the farm should be held in trust after the termination of the two life estates, in case he should be then surviving; and this preference was founded on tbe probability that be would remain at home upon the farm with his parents. In the ordinary course of nature the child is expected to survive his parents, and the testator undoubtedly contemplated Joseph’s surviving…
2Cited by2 opinions
- Texas Co. v. Central Fuel Oil Co.Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1912
- State ex rel. Rivoire v. St. PaulSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1900