Legal Opinion

Curtis v. Curtis

Court of Chancery of Delaware

Decided July 19, 1938PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

The Chancellor:

First, with respect to the $3,700 of Curtis Paper Company notes, the solicitors for Alfred A. Curtis, the legatee named in the seventh item of the will, concedes that his client can make no claim thereto. The concession appears to be entirely justified. The notes are properly to be -regarded as having been accepted by the testatrix in full satisfaction of the overdue interest as cash would have been. Had the testatrix been paid $3,700 in cash, certainly the legatee of the bonds could lay no claim to it. No more can he claim the notes. The executors should, therefore, treat the…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. Horn's EstateSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1934
  2. Chase National Bank v. DeichmillerNew Jersey Court of Chancery · 1930
  3. Goode v. ReynoldsCourt of Appeals of Kentucky (pre-1976) · 1925
  4. Johns Hopkins University v. UhrigCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1924
  5. Spinney v. EatonSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1913

5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. In re the Estate of DunganOrphan's Court of Delaware · 1950
  2. Irelan v. HammondCourt of Chancery of Delaware · 1942
  3. Matter of Estate of HobsonCourt of Chancery of Delaware · 1982
  4. In Re Dungan's EstateSuperior Court of Delaware · 1950
  5. Estate of Burke v. BurkeSupreme Court of Delaware · 2017

1 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