Gifford v. Thompson
Decision Date | 04 September 1874 |
Citation | 115 Mass. 478 |
Court | United States State Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts Supreme Court |
Parties | George H. Gifford v. John H. Thompson & others |
Bristol. Bill in equity by George H. Gifford, trustee under the will of Pardon Gifford, against the residuary legatees under said will, to obtain the direction of the court as to the disposition to be made of a sum of money received from the New Bedford and Taunton Railroad Company, in lieu of certain shares of the stock of said corporation, in which part of the trust fund had been invested.
The case was reserved by Morton, J., for the consideration of the full court upon the bill and answers, from which it appeared to be as follows:
The last will and testament of Pardon Gifford contained the following clause:
A part of the "rest and residue of said estate" was invested in the stock of the New Bedford and Taunton Railroad Corporation. That corporation acting under the authority conferred upon it by the St. of 1873, c. 20, [*] sold all its franchises and property, and being about to wind up its affairs and dissolve, its directors passed the following vote: "Voted, that a dividend of $ 150 per share is hereby declared, payable to stockholders of this day on the surrender of the certificates, when the treasurer shall have received $ 750,000 on account of the sale of the road including therein the drafts of our stockholders on our treasurer for and...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
R.I. Hosp. Trust Co. v. Bradley
...trust will not permit it to be taken entirely away from the remaindermen. The tenant for life should have only the income." In Gifford v. Thompson, 115 Mass. 478, the opinion is by Gray, C. J., who was a member of the court when Minot v. Paine was decided, and who afterwards wrote the opini......
-
Anderson v. Bean
...are capital and not income. Talbot v. Milliken, 221 Mass. 367, 368, 108 N. E. 1060. The case on this branch is governed by Gifford v. Thompson, 115 Mass. 478, and Brownell v. Anthony, 189 Mass. 442, 445, 75 N. E. 746. The binding force of these decisions in recognized in Gray v. Hemenway (M......
-
Gray v. Hemenway
...nor a step in winding up the corporate affairs, either of the Railroad Company or of the Securities Company, and cases such as Gifford v. Thompson, 115 Mass. 478, and Brownell v. Anthony, 189, Mass. 442, 75 N. E. 746, holding dividends in liquidation to the capital, do not apply. See Old Co......
-
Creed v. McAller (In re Connelly's Estate
...Cotting, 231 Mass. 42, 120 N. E. 177;Lannin v. Buckley, 256 Mass. 78, 84, 152 N. E. 71. The case at bar is distinguishable from Gifford v. Thompson, 115 Mass. 478;Brownell v. Anthony, 189 Mass. 442, 75 N. E. 746;Anderson v. Bean (Mass.) 172 N. E. 647; and from Heard v. Eldredge, 109 Mass. 2......