McKinley v. Martin
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Appeal, No. 104, Oct. T., 1909, by plaintiff, from judgment of C. P. No. 3, Allegheny Co., Feb. T., 1906, No. 803, on verdict for defendants in case of Lizzie McKinley v. Sarah E. Martin et al. Ejectment for land in the Fifth ward of the city of Pitts-burg. Before Davis, J. The opinion of the Supreme Court states the case. Verdict and judgment for defendants. Plaintiff appealed. Error assigned was in giving binding instructions for defendants.
1Opinion of the Court
Per Curiam,
This was an action of ejectment, and both parties claimed title under the following clause of the will of Arthur Martin, which followed a devise of his real estate to his wife for life: “To my son Joseph I allow the house on Poplar alley . ; if he is living or societing with his divorced wife, he shall never inherit that property, it shall go to Lizzie Martin McKinley, to support her fatherless children, Lizzie to pay Joseph ten dollars a year.” It appeared at the trial that the son had lived with his divorced wife at times between the testator’s death and the termination of the…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- In re Estate of JacksonSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1897
3Cited by11 opinions
- Booe v. VinsonSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1912
- Thompson's EstateSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1931
- Drace v. KlinedinstSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1922
- Schaefer v. VoyleSupreme Court of Florida · 1924
- Gunning's EstateSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1912
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.