Imágenes de páginas
PDF
EPUB

terests.

personal estate when he reaches the age of VII. RIGHTS AND LIABILITIES OF twenty-one years," coupled with power to sell DEVISEES AND LEGATEES. for the benefit of the grandson, held to create a

(A) Nature of Title and Rights in Gezlife estate, and no trust in view of Real Prop

eral. erty Law, & 92.-In re McCahill, 162 N. Y. S. lm729 (N.Y.) Where an absolute and una 996.

fied annuity is given, with instructions to in Om616(5) (N.Y.Sup.) A will giving to the testator's widow and mother each one-half of the annuitant may elect to take the capital

a sum sufficient to purchase the annuity, residue, with codicil stating that the mother's instead of having

it invested in the annuitbalf "should be hers absolutely, to use up, spend, In rc Cole's Estate, 114 N. E. 785, 219 XI or give away, in any way she sees fit," but, if 435. any such property remained undisposed of at her death, it should belong to the wife, if then liv. (B) Specific, Demonstrative, and General ing, gave the mother power of disposition by

Devises and Bequests. will of her half.-In re Ithaca Trust Co., 162 N. Y. S. 355.

Om753 (N.Y.) A specific legacy will be esta

strued in the light of the circumstances En (F) Vested or Contingent Estates and In.

ing when it was made.-In re Brann, 11+ I

E. 404, 219 N. Y. 263. 630(6) (N.Y.Sur.) The rule that, where a

(C) Advancements, Ademption, Satisface gift is contained merely in words of direction

tion, and Lapse. to pay over, a futuritive or contingent interest is created, is a rule of construction only, Em762 (N.Y.Sur.) Under a will directing that and must be applied in subordination to inten. obligations incurred by testatris for her son tion of testator, as gathered from the will.- deducted from a devise to him, the execut In re Myers, 162 N. Y. S. 119.

should deduct the balance outstanding on foc In no instance will the "divide and pay over" obligations from the son's share of the real > rule ignore the established rule of construction tate.-In re Steele's Estate, 162 N, Y. S. 718 that an estate or interest will be construed to be vested rather than contingent.-Id.

(F) Legacies Charged on Property, EOm634(7) (N.Y.Sur.) Provision of a will con

tate, or Interest. strued, and held to create remainder, in children of life beneficiary, of fund which vested m 820(1) (N.Y.) Whether a legacy is charged at death of testatrix.— In re Myers, 162 N. Y. by implication on real estate is to be detera

ed from the language of the will in the binti S. 119.

of extrinsic circumstances; testator's intenta Omw 634(12) (N.Y.Şur.) Children of life tenant being the guide.-Carley v. Harper, 114 X. E held not to acquire any vested remainder on 351, 219 N. Y, 295, death of testatrix, the will providing that child m 820(3) (N.Y.) Excess of legacies over pe or children of life tenant who survived him sonal property, power of sale, mingling of real should take.-In re Petheram, 162 N. Y. S. and personal property in residuary clauses 953.

direction to pay transfer tax ont of resida. (H) Estates in Trust and Powers.

held. to authorize finding that the legacies De

a charge on real property.-Carley F. Harpe 692 (N.Y.Sur.) Will construed, and held, 114 N. E. 351, 219 N. Y. 295. that powers of appointment given to testator's children after death of testator's wife vested at death of testator, and were not dependent upon

(G) Debts of Testator and Incumbrances

on Property. appointees surviving the widow.-In re Moore's Estate, 162 N. Y, S. 213.

832 (N.Y.Sup.) Where testator gare proper

ty to wife legatees under her will took the party (I) Actions to construe Wills. erty chargeable in equity with debts of origina

testator.-Rositzke v. Meyer, 162 N. Y. S. 613. cm 695(4) (N.Y.Sur.) Surrogate's Court will not, in any event, construe will to determine ww836 (N.Y.Sup.). Where testator gave properhow testatrix's property would vest, if cer- ty to wife, and wife subsequently viiled it to tain events should happen or certain contingen- others, although devisees claim under will cies arise.-In re Graham's Estate, 162 N. Y. wife, they take property chargeable in eccity S. 861.

with debts of original testator.-Rositzke 1. On happening of any event mentioned in will Meyer, 162 N. Y. S. 613. on which vesting in possession of part of trust estate is contingent, application may be made (H) Void, Lapsed, and Forfeited Derises to Surrogate's Court for construction of will and Bequests, and Property and to provide for proper distribution by trustee.

Interests Undisposed of. -Id.

Omw 865(3) (N.Y.Sup.) Where testator deris:? em 707(1) (N.Y.) Allowance in the discretion lands to his son for life and on his death to of the court of additional costs to defendants grandson, when he reached the age of 21. if 1" in a suit involving construction of a will is son should die before the grandson reacbed sa proper under Code Civ. Proc. $ 3253, subd. 2. age, income accumulated up to that time wezi --Carley v. Harper, 114 N. E. 351, 219 N. Y. pass to the grandson as residuary legatee.295.

re McCahill, 162 N, Y. S. 996.

WITNESSES.

gate charities, etc., may refuse to testify in See Evidence; Obstructing Justice; Perjury.

investigation to identity of authors and in

stigators of libelous publications, on ground . II. COMPETENCY.

that, if publications constituted criminal con

spiracy, such persons could not be required to (A) Capacity and Qualifications in Gen-testify against themselves. —People v. Hebberd, eral.

162 N. Y. S, SO. m78 (N.Y.) The burden of proving facts showing disqualification of a witness is on him who IV. CREDIBILITY, IMPEACHMENT, asserts such disqualification.-Franklin v. Kidd,

CONTRADICTION, AND COR114 N. E. 839, 219 N. Y. 409.

ROBORATION.

(A) In General. (C) Testimony of Parties or Persons In

terested, for or against Representa-Eww.326 (N.Y.Sup.) In an action for death by tives, Survivors, or Successors in Ti- negligence, where defendant's witness testified to tle or Interest of Persons Deceased or inconsistent statements of plaintiff's witness, it Incompetent.

was proper to show that defendant's witness, 140(2). (N.Y.) Under Code Civ. Proc. $ 829, when he procured the statement of plaintiff's disqualifying a person "interested in the event" witness, was employed by a casualty company from testifying concerning a personal transac- insuring defendant, though it indicated that the

tion with decedent, etc., an interest which is casualty company was interested.-Hummel v. aplly uncertain, remote, or contingent is not suffi- L. S. Fischl's Son, Inc., 162 N. Y. S. 150. apie cient to disqualify, but it must be such that

gain or loss must result to the witness from (B) Character and Conduct of Witness. the judgment in its direct or immediate opera-m345(1) (N.Y.Sup.) It was error to allow a tion.-Franklin v. Kidd, 114 N. E. 839, 219 N. witness to be discredited by evidence that he Y, 409.

had been indicted.-Greenhut v. Rosendorf, 162 One is not a person "interested in the event"N. Y. S. 345. under Code Civ. Proc. $ 829, merely because the outcome of the suit may save him the (D) Inconsistent Statements by Witness. trouble of another lawsuit.-Id.

To establish a witness' "interest in the event,” Om 380(9), (N.Y.Sup.) Plaintiff does not make a pre disqualifying him under Code Civ. Proc. $ 829. witness his own, as regards right to contradict

it is not sufficient to prove that the event of by his prior statement bis testimony for dethe instant suit may tempt to other litigation having 'no bearing on the litigated issues, to

fendant, he merely asking him some questions affecting the witness.-Id.

show witness' connection with defendant, and w 140(2) (N.Y.Sup.) Where defendant execu

to remove effect on jurors caused by action of tors contended that a sale was made to a wit- | defendant's counsel in questioning another in ness of plaintiff, and not to their decedent as

respect to said witness.- Valenti v. Mesinger, contended by plaintiff, the witness testimony re 162 N. Y. S. 30. specting the sale transaction with the deceased was competent, for he was not a person "inter- ww392(1) (N.Y.Sup.) Prior statement of witested in the event,” incompetent under Code Civ.

ness that the handle of the switch of the elevaProc. & 829.-West End Brewing Co. v. Utica

tor was off would tend to destroy his testimony Trust & Deposit Co., 162 N. Y. Š. 537.

that he saw nothing out of order with respect

to the elevator.-Valenti v. Mesinger, 162 N. Y. www 140(13) (N.Y.) Where, after judgment on a | S. 30. note against an indorser by a bank which had discounted it, the payee paid and took an as (E) Contradiction and Corroboration of signment of the judgment, and the indorser

Witness. sued to restrain its enforcement on the ground uw 406 (N.Y.Sup.) It is error to permit a witthat the note had been executed for the payee's ness to characterize the testimony given by anbenefit, and the payee died pendente lite, the other witness as a mistake.-Simons v. Long maker' was not "interested in the event,” and Island R. Co., 162 N. Y. S. 987. disqualified under Code Civ. Proc. § 829, to testify for the indorser.-Franklin v. Kidd, 114 N. E. 839, 219 N. Y. 409.

WORDS AND PHRASES.
III. EXAMINATION.

"About."-Weinmann v. Fellman (N. Y. Sup.)

162 N. Y. S. 131. (A) Taking Testimony in General. “Accidental."— Days_v. S. Trimmer & Sons (N. Sam 246(1) (N.Y.Sup.) Trial, judge committed Y. Sup.) 162 N. Y. S. 603, impropriety in taking control of examination of “Account stated."-Newburger-Morris Co. v.

witness out of hands of counsel and giving pro Talcott (N. Y.) 114 N. E. 846. to nounced emphasis to discrepancy between tes- "Admitted liability.”—Galvanotype Engraving

timony of two of defendant's witnesses upon Co. .v. International Bible Students' Ass'n matter interjected into trial by court.-Simons (N. Y. Sup.) 162 N. Y. S. 757. v. Long Island R. Co., 162 N. Y, S. 987. "Agreement binding upon the holder.”—Brose

mer v. Brosemer (N. Y. Sup.) 162 N. Y, S. (0) Privilege of Witness.

1067. 293/2 (N.Y.Sup.) Persons subpoenaed by "Apparatus.”—Kunasek v. New_York Consol. commissioner appointed by Governor to investi Card Co, (N. Y. Sup.) 162 N. Y. S. 361.

For cases in Dec, Dig. & Am. Dig. Key No. Series & Indexes see same topic and KEY-NUMBER

V.

“Appealable order."-Monteforte v. Ætna Life, “Employment.”—Hellyer v. Prendergast (I

Ins. Co. of Hartford, Conn. (N. Y. Sup.) 162 Sup.) 162 N. Y. S. 788.
N. Y. S. 762.

"Engaged in interstate commerce."--Gieri “Approaches."-In re Rosedale Ave. in City of New York Cent. R. Co. (X. Y. Sup 1 New York (N. Y. Sup.) 162 N. Y. S. 877.

N. Y. S. 1026. “Arising out of and in the course of employ "Factory."--O'Connor v. Webber (N. 1.) IH

ment."-Holtz v. Greenhut & Co. (N. Y. N. E. 799. Sup.) 162 N. Y. S. 359.

"Fair comment."--People v. Hebberd (X I "Arising out of employment."-Griffin V. A. Sup.) 162 N. Y. S. 80. Roberson & Son (N. Y. Sup.) 162 N. Y. S. "Fellow servant."-Nanfra v. Holbrook, Case 313.

& Rollins Corp. (N. Y. Sup.) 162 X. I. "Assistant teacher."-People ex rel. Becker v. 1094.

Board of Education of City of New York (N. / “Final order."-In re Leland's Will (N. I 184 Y. Sup.) 162 N. Y, S. 613.

N. E. 854, 219 N. Y. 387; In re Kabel : "Baggage."-Borden v. New York Cent. R. Co. Y. Sup.) 162 N. Y. S. 218. (N. Y. City Ct.) 162 N. Y. S. 1099.

"Fox."-Adamson v. Schreiner (N. Y. Sup.) 16 "Block to block rule.”—In re St. Raymond Ave. N. Y. S. 653.

in City of New York (N. Y. Sup.) 162 N. Y. "Freeholders."-In re Village of Holcomb in S. 185.

Ontario County (N. Y. Co. Ct.) 162 N. I. : "Business."-Mandl v. McKegney (N. Y. Sup.) 848. 162 N. Y. S. 900.

"Full and prompt payment."-First Nat. Bari "Cause of action."-Casualty Co. of America v. Jones (N. Y.5 114 N. E. 349, 219 X I. V. A. L. Swett Electric Light & Power Co.

312. (N. Y. Sup.) 162 N. Y. S. 107.

"Hazardous_business.”—McCabe v. Brooking "Chauffeur."-People v. Fulton (N. Y. Co. Ct.) Heights R. Co. (N. Y. Sup.) 162 N, I. & 162 N. Y. S. 125.

741, "Child."-In re Petheram (N. Y. Sur.) 162 N. "Hazardous employment."-Hellman y.

Manas Y. S. 953.

Sand Paper Co. (N. Y. Sup.) 162 X, L1 “Coemployé.”—Connors International Ry. 335. Co. (N. Y. Sup.) 162 N. Y. S. 1085.

"Holder in due course."-Empire Trust Co. "Colorable assignment."-Century Holding Co. President and Directors of Manhattan Ce

v. Ebling Brewing Co. (N. Y. Sup.) 162 N. (N. Y. Sup.) 162 N. Y. S. 629, Y, S. 1061.

"Home and board."- Murphy v. TFeedle N “Commodity."-Mundler v. Palmer (N. Y. Sup.) Y. Sup.) 162 N. Y. S. 874. 162 N. Y, S. 605.

"Income."-In re Balch's Estate (N. 1. Sur. Common carrier.”-Heuman v. M. H. Powers

162 N. Y. S. 940. Co. (N. Y. Sup.) 162 N. Y. S. 590.

"Injuries arising out of and incidental to e "Condition precedent."-Rosenthal Paper Co. v. ployment."-McCabe v. Brooklyn Heights I National Folding Box & Paper Co. (N. Y.

Co. (N. Y. Sup.) 162 N. Y. S. 741. Sup.) 162 N. Y. S. 814.

"Insurance against loss or injury by fire." “Container.”—People ex inf. Eylers v. Armour

Adamson v. Schreiner (N. Y. Sup.) 162 S. T. & Co. (N. Y. Sup.) 162 N. Y, S. 621,

S. 653. "Conversion."-Cohen v. Frank J. Felgenhauer Interested in the event.”—Franklin v. 6 Co. (N. Y. Sup.) 162 N. Y. S. 306.

(N. Y.) 114 N. E. 839, 219 N. Y. 409; T25 "Counterclaim."-Dessar Gunther (N. Y.

End Brewing Co. v. Utica Trust & Depsi Sup.) 162 N. Y. S. 794.

Co. (N. Y. Sup.) 162 N. Y. S. 537. "Criminal libel.” –People v. Hebberd (N. Y. “'Invoice price."-Larkin Co. v. New York, C

Sup.) 162 N. Y. S. 80. “Decision."-In re Rabell (N. Y. Sup.) 162 N. "Judgment.”—In re Rabell (N. Y. Sup.) 6N

St. L. R. Co. (N. Y, Sup.) 162 N. Y. S sở Y, S. 218.

Y. S. 218, "Decorating.”—Grasell v. Broadhead (N. Y. “Laboratory assistant.”—People ex rel. Becker Sup.) 162 N. Y. S. 421.

v. Board of Education of City of New York “Decorator.”—Grasell v. Broadhead (N. Y. Sup.)

(N. Y. Sup.) 162 N. Y. S. 643. 162 N. Y. S. 421. “Defect in ways."—Wells v. C. A. Agar & Co.,

"Legal services.”—People ex rel. Holzman ,

Purdy (N. Y. Sup.) 162 N. Y. S. 65. (N. Y. Sup.) 162 N. Y. S. 1078. "Delivery."-Saltzsieder v. Saltzsieder (N. Y.)

"Loss of hand."-Grammici v. Zinn (N. Y.) 114 114 N. E. 856.

N. E. 397, 219 N. Y. 322. "Divide and pay over rule."-In re Myers (N. / "Loss of use of hand.”-Grammici v. Zing A Y. Sur.) 162 N. Y, S. 119.

Y.) 114 N. E, 397, 219 N. Y. 322. “Due scheduling."-Merchants Bank of Brook- "Manufacturing company."-People

lyn v. Mill :r (N. Y. Sup.) 162 N. Y. S. 999. Tompkins Cove Stone Co. v. Saxe (N. I "Duly.”-First Bank of Notasulga v. Casualty

Sup.) 162 N. Y. S. 408. Co. of America (N. Y. Sup.) 162 N. Y. š. “Material."-People v. Hebberd (N. Y. St 349.

162 N. Y. S. 80. “Employé."-Bowne v. 8. W. Bowne Co. (N. Y. "Member of teaching staff.”—People es

Sup.) 162 N. Y. S. 244; Hellman v. Man Becker v. Board of Education of City of No ning Sand Paper Co., Id. 335; Grasell v. York (N. Y. Sup.) 162 N. Y, S. 643. Broadhead, Id. 421; Kehoe v. Consolidated "More or less."-Weinmann v. Fellman (N. I

Telegraph & Electrical Subway Co., Id. 481. Sup.) 162 N. Y. S. 131. "Employer."-Sicardi v. Sarnoff Hat Co. (N. Y. “Mortgagees in possession." -Mulcahy F. Webe Sup.) 162 N. Y. S. 337.

(N. Y. Sup.) 162 N. Y. S. 985.

[ocr errors]

er

[ocr errors]

glect."-Sweeting v. Staten Island Midland | "Share and share alike."-In re Myers (N. Y. ty. Co. (N. Y. Sup.) 162 N. Y. S. 961.

Sur.) 162 N. Y. S. 119. gotiated."--Empire Trust Co. v. President “Statute.”—City of Rome v. Foot (N. Y. Sup.) ind Directors of Manhattan Co. (N. Y. Sup.) 162 N. Y, S. 781. L62 N. Y. S. 629.

"Stockholder.”—Richards v. Ackerman (N. Y. xt of kin."-Hamilton v. Erie R. Co. (N. Sup.) 162 N. Y. S. 657. Y.) 114 N. E. 399, 219 N. Y. 343.

"Such examination."-Rapp v. City of New structing justice.”—People v. Hebberd (N. York (N. Y. Sup.) 162 N. Y. S. 300. Y. Sup.) 162 N. Y. S. 80.

"Surviving wife."-Crockett V. International Derate or drive." _Wolcott v. Renault Selling, Ry. Co. (N. Y. Sup.) 162 N. Y. S. 357. Branch (N. Y. Sup.) 162 N. Y. S. 496. “Ultimate."-First Nat. Bank v. Jones (N. Y.) riginal.">Arenson v. Jackson (N. Y. Sup.) 114 N. E. 349, 219 N. Y. 312. 162 N. Y. S. 142.

“Undue influence.”—In re Powers (N. Y. Sup.) cher power."-Holtz v. Greenhut & Co. (N. 162 N. Y. S. 828. Y. Sup.) 162 N. Y, S. 359.

“Unmarketable title.”-Hilliker v. Rueger (N. wn act."-Borden v. New York Cent, R. Co. Y.) 114 N. E. 391, 219 N. Y. 334. (N. Y. City Ct.) 162 N. Y. S. 1099.

"Verdict."-In re Rabell (N. Y. Sup.) 162 N. Y. erjury.”—People v. Hebberd (N. Y. Sup.) S. 218. 162 N. Y. S. 80.

"Vice principal."-Connors v. International Ry. osition higher in rank.”—People ex rel. Beck Co. (N. Y. Sup.) 162 N. Y. S. 1085. er y. Board of Education of City of New “Want of understanding.”-In re Leland's Will York (N. Y. Sup.) 162 N. Y. S. 643.

(N. Y.) 114 N. E. 854, 219 N. Y. 387. ositions.”—People ex rel. Fowler v. Moskowitz (N. Y. Sup.) 162 N. Y. S. 453.

WORK AND LABOR. racticing law."--People ex rel. Trojan Real- See Contracts, C346; Mechanics' Liens; SetCo. v. Purdy (N. Y. Sup.) 162 N. Y.

Off and Counterclaim, ww33.
'reference.”—Postal Telegraph-Cable Co. yWORKMENS' COMPENSATION ACT.
Associated Press (N. Y. Sup.) 162 N. Y.
S. 4.

See Master and Servant, Em351-417.
Property."-Holmes v. Camp (N. Y.) 114 N.
E, 841, 219 N. Y. 359.

WRITS.
Lefuse."--Sweeting v. Staten Island Midland
Ry. Co. (N. Y. Sup.) 162 N. Y. S. 901.

See Attachment; Execution; Injunction; Manleport."-In re Rabell (N. Y. Sup.) 162 N. Y.

damus; Process. S. 218. letrial.”—Winsor v. Bush (N. Y. Sup.) 162 N.

X-RAY.
Y, S. 265.

See Damages, mm 206.
For cases in Dec. Dig. & Am. Dig. Key No, Series & Indexes see same topic and KEY-NUMBER

š. 56.

In

TA

« AnteriorContinuar »