Collins v. Collins
| Decision Date | 24 May 1912 |
| Citation | 212 Mass. 131,98 N.E. 588 |
| Parties | COLLINS v. COLLINS. |
| Court | United States State Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts Supreme Court |
OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE
Appeal from Superior Court, Middlesex County.
Bill of complaint to enforce performance of an antenuptial contract, brought by John J. Collins, the only heir of John Collins, against Bridget Collins. From an order overruling a demurrer to the bill of complaint, defendant appeals. Affirmed.
John J. O'Connor, of Boston, for plaintiff.
Robt. E. Burke and Edwd. E. Crawshaw, both of Newburyport, for defendant.
[1] In her antenuptial contract with John Collins the defendant agreed, in the event of her surviving him, to release all interest in his estate except the claim for one thousand dollars and the security provided therefor. The bill of complaint alleges that the plaintiff, who is the sole heir of the deceased husband, has duly tendered this money and is ready and willing to pay it to the defendant, but that she refuses to release her interest in the estate. The contract is a lawful one and will be enforced in equity. Paine v. Hollister, 139 Mass. 144, 29 N. E. 541.
[2][3] The provisions of R. L. c. 153, § 26, relied upon in the defendant's demurrer, apply only to antenuptial contracts enabling the respective parties to hold their separate property after marriage, and do not affect an antenuptial agreement relating only to the rights which a widow may claim in the estate of her deceased husband. So far as the bill discloses, the defendant had no separate property. Even assuming that the statute may apply to the agreement in question, it does not affect her obligation to release all interest in the estate of her late husband; and the demurrer was rightly overruled. Jenkins v. Holt, 109 Mass. 261;Freeland v. Freeland, 128 Mass. 509.
Decree affirmed with costs.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Price v. Price
...to such an agreement and beneficiaries of a party's testamentary trust have standing to enforce such an agreement. Collins v. Collins, 212 Mass. 131, 133, 98 N.E. 588; Jones v. Jones, 297 Mass. 198, 204, 7 N.E.2d The bill sets out the complete texts of the antenuptial agreement and of Louis......
-
Bickford v. Bickford, CA971569B
... ... See, e.g., Price v. Price , 341 Mass. 390 ... (1960); Wellington , 243 Mass. 30 (1922); Eaton ... v. Eaton , 233 Mass. 351 (1919); Collins v ... Collins , 212 Mass. 131 (1912); Paine v ... Hollister , 139 Mass. 144 (1885); Freeland v ... Freeland , 128 Mass. 509 (1880); Jenkins ... ...
-
Keith v. Keith
...278; Freeland v. Freeland, 128 Mass. 509, 511; Paine v. Hollister, 139 Mass. 144 , 145; Deshon v. Wood, 148 Mass. 132, 134-135; Collins v. Collins, 212 Mass. 131; Welch King, 279 Mass. 445, 448-449. For reasons that will shortly appear, we need not decide whether an oral agreement of this k......
-
City of Boston v. City of Chelsea
...in kind from the determination of the municipalities which should bear the general burdens of public administration and the proportions[212 Mass. 131]in which they should contribute, which is a question rather of political or governmental expediency. Moreover, the effect of the report when ......