President & Directors of Manhattan Co. v. Osgood
New York Supreme Court
s • THIS was an action of assumpsit on two promissory notes, made by Walter F. Osgood, and endorsed by Maria Osgood, ■ against the defendants, as her representatives, who were all either her children, or the husbands of such of her daughters as were married. The defendants, De Witt Clinton and Maria his wife, John L. Morton and Sarah his wife, and Hannah Clinton, pleaded riens per discent, and the plaintiffs •took judgments of assets, quando acciderint.
Read the full summary
s • THIS was an action of assumpsit on two promissory notes, made by Walter F. Osgood, and endorsed by Maria Osgood, ■ against the defendants, as her representatives, who were all either her children, or the husbands of such of her daughters as were married. The defendants, De Witt Clinton and Maria his wife, John L. Morton and Sarah his wife, and Hannah Clinton, pleaded riens per discent, and the plaintiffs •took judgments of assets, quando acciderint. The other defendants, Walter F. Osgood, Edmund C. Genet and Martha B. his wife, Samuel Osgood and Juliana Tais wife, pleaded the general…
1Opinion of the CourtYates, J.
The executors, as the legal representatives of the deceased, had exhibited the statement under oath, and filed it, with the petition, in the surrogate’s office, with an intention of obtaining an order to sell the real estate, but which was afterwards, abandoned. It appears to me that the executors, of all others, were the best informed on the subject, and were competent to make admissions sanctioned by their oaths; particularly as to a collateral fact. Those documents were, therefore, properly admitted in evidence,(b) as stated in the case, for the purpose of showing the testator’s…
2Cited by18 opinions
- Union Savings Bank & Trust Co. v. DottenheimSupreme Court of Georgia · 1899
- New York Firemen Insurance v. ElyNew York Supreme Court · 1824
- Goodrich v. Reynolds, Wilder & Co.Illinois Supreme Court · 1863
- Loomis v. TifftNew York Supreme Court · 1853
- Vahlberg v. KeatonSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1889
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.