White v. Jenkins
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
Mr. Turner, in answer to the usual interrogatory, stated that, on the 13th of September, 1811, Daniel Jenkins, father of the defendant, executed the following instrument in writing, viz.—“ In consider ation of the love and good will I bear to my son Paul Jenkins, I hereby promise to pay out of my estate, at my decease, 500 dollars to»Charles Turner and Jesse Dunbar, to be held by them as my trustees; they to give bond to the judge of probate for the county of Plymouth, to…
Read the full summary
Mr. Turner, in answer to the usual interrogatory, stated that, on the 13th of September, 1811, Daniel Jenkins, father of the defendant, executed the following instrument in writing, viz.—“ In consider ation of the love and good will I bear to my son Paul Jenkins, I hereby promise to pay out of my estate, at my decease, 500 dollars to»Charles Turner and Jesse Dunbar, to be held by them as my trustees; they to give bond to the judge of probate for the county of Plymouth, to appropriate the same, at their discretion, for the maintenance and support of my said son Paul; and if he should not live…
1Per curiam
The respondents cannot be considered as the trustees of the principal defendant; because they are in no view indebted, and t'.ie defendant can maintain no action for the sum committed in trust to them. They are to appropriate the sum of 500 dollars to the support of the defendant, at their discretion, during his life, *54and afterwards to distribute it among the other children of the donor. There may be good reasons for paying nothing to the defendant; and it is in every event entirely at the discretion of the respondents, when and how much they shall pay him. Further, it would be im possible to…
2Cited by3 opinions
- Banfield v. WigginSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1877
- Richards v. Merrimack & Connecticut River RailroadSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1860
- Adams v. BlodgettU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Massachusetts · 1846