56 N.Y. 407, Bailey v. Briggs
| Citation | 56 N.Y. 407 |
| Date | 28 April 1874 |
| Docket Number | . |
| Parties | WILLIAM H. BAILEY, Appellant, v. SUSAN B. BRIGGS et al., Respondents. |
| Court | New York Court of Appeals Court of Appeals |
Page 407
Argued Apr. 20, 1874.
Page 408
[Copyrighted Material Omitted]
Page 409
[Copyrighted Material Omitted]
Page 410
COUNSEL
Nathaniel C. Moak for the appellant. The court erred in dismissing the complaint. ( McKeon v. Lee, 4 Rob., 465; Lewis v. Mott, 36 N.Y. 399; Greason v. Ketteltas, 17 Id., 465; N.Y. , etc., v. N. W., etc., 23 Id., 357; Barlow v. Scott, 24 Id., 40; Dunnell v. Ketteltas, 16 Abb., 205; Marquat v. Marquat, 12 N.Y. 341; Emery v. Pease, 20 Id., 62; Whitney v. Whitney, 49 Barb., 323; Jones v. Buller, 20 How., 189; Armitage v. Pulver, 37 N.Y. 494; Davis v. Morris, Id., 569; Bass v. Comstock, 38 Id., 21; Anderson v. Hill, 53 Barb., 238; Henderson v. Jackson, 9 Abb. [ N. S.], 293.) The complaint contained a good cause of action under the statute in regard to the determination of claims to real estate; and the remedy could be sought by an action under the Code. (2 R. S., 312, 313; as amended, Laws 1848, 67; Laws 1855, 943; 2 Edm. St., 321, 322; Code, § 449; Hammond v. Tillotson, 18 Barb., 332; Hager v. Hager, 38 Id., 98; Mann v. Provost, 3 Abb., 446; Brown v. Leigh, 49 N.Y. 78; Holbrook v. Winsor, 23 Mich., 394; Peck v. Brown, 2 Rob., 119; 26 How., 354; Belknap v. Sealey, 2 Duer, 571, 578, 579; Bate v. Graham, 11 N.Y. 241, 242; Miller v. White, 8 Abb. [ N. S.], 46.) If the action would not lie against the
Page 411
infant, it was error to dismiss the complaint as against the adult defendants. (Voorhies' Code, § 274, sub. 1, and cases cited; McGuire v. Johnson, 2 Lans., 305.)A court of equity has jurisdiction of and will sustain a bill to establish a will against an heir at law by a mere legal devise not charged with any duty or trust under the will. (Colcleugh v. Boyse, 6 H. L. Cas., 1; affirming 2 De G., MacN. & G., 817; Smith's Manual of Eq. [ Am. ed.], 409; 2 Story's Eq. Jur., § 1447; Jackson v. Rumsey, 3 J. Cas., 234; Morris v. Keyes, 1 Hill, 542; Vanderpoel v. Van Valkenburgh, 6 N.Y. , 199; 2 R. S., 58, § 15; 2 Edm. St., 59; Fisher v. Hubbell, 65 Barb., 75, 90; Bowers v. Bowers, 1 Abb. [ Ct. Apps. Dec.], 214; 9 N Y. L. Obs., 196; Bowers v. Smith, 10 Paige, 193; Middleton v. Sherman, 4 Y. & C. [ Exch.], 358.) A bill, in the nature of a billquia timet, lies to quiet title where adverse claims are or may be set up at some distant day. ( Refd., etc., v. Parkhurst, 4 Bos., 498, 499; 2 Story's Eq. Jur., § § 825, 826; Kerr on Injunctions, 134, 136; MacN. Select Cas., 45, marg. page note to; Dalton v. Dalton, citing anon.; 2 Ves. Sen., 415; Hemphill v. McKenna, 3 D. & W., 183; Story's Eq. Pl., § 255, note 4 [7th ed.].) The defendants unjustly and illegally claimed title to the real estate in question. (13 N.Y. 287; Jackson v. Staats, 11 J. R., 337-351; Murphy v. Harvey, 4 Edw. Ch., 131; 2 Redf. on Wills, 643, 707, 708, § § 11, 12; Groat v. Townsend, 2 Den., 336; 2 Broom's Com., 221, et seq.; 1 N.Y. 483; 4 Id., 56, 61; Parkman v. Bowdoin, 1 Sumn., 363; Seibert v. Wise, 70 Penn. St., 147; Ogden's appeal, Id., 501; Post v. Post, 47 Barb., 72, 89; 2 Jar. on Wills, 307, marg. page; Tucker v. Tucker, 5 N.Y. , 13; Massey v. Parker, 2 M. & K., 181; Ware v. Cann, 10 B. & C. [ 21 E. C. L.], 433; Bradley v. Piexotto, 3 Ves., 324; Cuthbert v. Park, 2 M. & K., 182, 183; Fraborn v. Wagner, 49 Barb., 43, 53, 56; Oates v. Jackson, 2 Str., 1172; 7 Mod., 439, 447; Cook v. Cook, 2 Vern., 545; Sears v. Putnam, 102 Mass., 5; 2 Jar. on Wills, 307, marg. page; Patterson v. Ellis, 11 Wend., 259; Norris v. Beyer, 13 N.Y. 281, 283; Everitt v. Everitt, 29 Id., 39, 76, 77;
Page 412
Jassen v. Wright, 2 Bligh, 1; Doe v. Atkinson, 1 B & A. [20 E. C. L.], 944; Franklin v. Lay, 6 Mad. Ch., 258; Leigh v. Nor bury, 13 Ves., 339; Roe v. Grew, 2 Wils., 322; King v. Burchell, 1 Eden, 424; Awb., 379; Devin v. Puckey, 5 T. R., 299; Frank v. Stovin, 3 East, 548; Doe v. Applin, 4 T. R., 82; Stanley v. Leonard, 1 Eden, 87; Wright v. Pearson, Id., 119; Awb., 358; Goodwright v. Pullen, 2 Ld. R., 1437; 2 Str., 729; Morris v. Ward, 8 T. R., 516, 518; Aeposs v. Smith, 7 East, 531; Doe v. Cooper, 1 Id., 229; Pierson v. Vickers, 5 Id., 548; Bennett v. Earl of T., 19 Ves., 170; Doe v. Goldsmith, 7 Taunt., 209; 2 E. C. L.; 2 Marsh., 517; Doe v. Harvey, 4 B. & C.; 10 E. C. L., 610.) The devise is void because it suspends the alienation for a longer time than for two lives in being. (1 R. S., 723, § § 14, 15, 16; 1 Edm. St., 672; 1 R. S., 673; 1 Edm. St., 727; Persons v. Snook, 40 Barb., 152; Emmons v. Cairnes, 3 Id., 248; Everitt v. Everitt, 29 N.Y. 39, 43, 77, 78.)
Burton N. Harrison for the respondents. The complaint was properly dismissed. ( Mann v. Fairchild, 2 Keyes, 111; Heywood v. City of Buffalo, 14 N.Y. 540; Bowers v. Smith, 10 Paige, 193; Onderdonk v. Mott, 34 Barb., 106.) Plaintiff is not entitled to any relief from a court of equity upon the complaint, except for a construction of the will. (Story's Eq. Jur., § § 701, 702, 710, 825, 851.) This action cannot be maintained as a bill of peace. (Story's Eq. Jur., § § 853-860; Eldridge v. Hill, 2 J. Ch., 282; Trustees of Huntington v. Nicoll, 3 J. R., 556.) The complaint did not state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action. ( Hammond v. Tillotson, 18 Barb., 332; Onderdonk v. Mott, 34 Id., 115; Hager v. Hager, 38 Id., 92.) The defendants were not obliged to require a jury. ( Davis v. Morris, 36 N.Y. 572; McKeon v. See, 4 Robt., 465, citing 23 N.Y. 357; 24 Id., 40; 17 Id., 491; Bradley v. Aldrich, 40 Id., 504; Mann v. Fairchild, 2 Keyes, 111.) The refusal to allow the amendments proposed on the trial was proper. (Code, § 173; 18 How., 506; 10 Abb., 372; 11 Id., 42; Ford v. Ford, 53 Barb., 525.)
Page 413
FOLGER, J.
To legal apprehension, the first view of the complaint would indicate that the action was brought, to obtain the judicial construction of a clause in a last will and testament devising real estate. It avers an interest in the lands, in the plaintiff; it sets out the will under which he holds that interest; it avers that some of the defendants claim an interest in the...
To continue reading
Request your trial