Merritt v. Merritt

Decision Date18 October 1887
Citation43 N.J.E. 11,10 A. 835
PartiesMERRITT v. MERRITT and others.
CourtNew Jersey Court of Chancery

Bill for accounting and relief. On demurrer to complainant's bill.

M. P. Gray and W. H. Hepburn, for complainant. Thomas N. McCarter and A. V. Schenok, for demurrants.

MCGILL, Ch. The complainant's bill alleges that George Merritt made his will on October 3, 1871, at Perth Amboy, in this state, in and by which he gave to each of his four unmarried daughters the sum of $10,000; directed his executors to invest $15,000, and pay the income thereof to his married daughter, Isabella M. Hawley, during her life, and the principal sum to her children at her death; directed the investment of $15,000 on bond and mortgage, and the payment of the interest and income therefrom to his son, in quarter-yearly payments during his life, and, at the son's death, the payment of the principal to the son's issue, if any, and, if none, then to the testator's surviving children, and gave the residue of his estate to his four unmarried daughters, and made those daughters the executrices of the will.

On the twenty-ninth day of December in the same year, Mr. Merritt executed a codicil to his will, in which he provided as follows: "I do hereby revoke, and declare null and void, the legacy of fifteen thousand dollars ($15,000) devised and bequeathed by me, in my last will and testament of date above mentioned, to my son, Nehemiah Merritt, and in lieu thereof I hereby direct the executors of my aforesaid will and testament to invest in bond and mortgage, on good landed securities, sufficient money to produce the annual sum of one thousand dollars, ($1,000,) the said one thousand dollars per annum to be paid in equal weekly payments to the said Nehemiah Merritt. And it is further my desire that my executor or executors shall cause said one thousand dollars to be placed in a reliable bank in New York city, subject to the weekly order of said Nehemiah Merritt, and his receipts will be the discharge for the above. And it is my desire, after the decease of my son, Nehemiah Merritt, the moneys above named, secured by bond and mortgage, shall be divided, share and share alike, between my five daughters. If any one of them should die without heirs, then her share to be divided among the others; but subject to the provisions in my above-named will and testament."

The testator died in December, 1874, and his four unmarried daughters proved his will and the codicil thereto, and took upon themselves the executorship. Shortly afterwards, while the legal interest in New Jersey was 7 per centum per annum, the executors invested $17,000 to produce the $1,000 annually for the complainant. For a time the $1,000 was promptly paid to the annuitant; then the legal rate of interest was lowered to 6 per centum per annum, and it became difficult to invest at that rate, and, indeed, at all; so that, through delay in looking for investments, and because of the incidental expenses of the trust, the $17,000 did not yield $1,000 per annum above the expenses of the trust. For a considerable time $600 of the moneys which should have been deposited in bank for the benefit of the complainant remained due undeposited, and unpaid to him, and at the riling of the bill $100 yet remained due and unpaid. The bill...

To continue reading

Request your trial
7 cases
  • Merriam v. Merriam
    • United States
    • Minnesota Supreme Court
    • June 18, 1900
    ...for appellants. Counsel cited: Moore v. Alden, 80 Me. 301; Pierrepont v. Edwards, 25 N.Y. 128; Boomhower v. Babbitt, 67 Vt. 327; Merritt v Merritt, 43 N.J.Eq. 11; Additon v. Smith, 83 Me. 551; May Bennett, 1 Russ. 370; Boyd v. Buckle, 10 Simon, 595, 596; Trevor v. Trevor, 5 Russ. 24; Davies......
  • Commercial Trust Co. of N.J. v. Kohl
    • United States
    • New Jersey Court of Chancery
    • March 2, 1942
    ...to be paid absolutely and usually without contingency. 3 C.J. § 2, p. 201, and § 29, p. 212; 3 C.J.S., Annuities, § 1 and § 5; Merritt v. Merritt, 43 N.J.Eq. 11. 10 A. 835; Welsh v. Brown, 43 N.J.L. 37; Pennington v. Metropolitan Museum of Art, 65 N.J.Eq. 11, 55 A. 468; Steelman v. Wheaton,......
  • Blanchard v. Blanchard
    • United States
    • New Jersey Court of Chancery
    • August 8, 1934
    ...v. Allen, 76 N. J. Eq. 245, 74 A. 274, 139 Am. St. Rep. 758; Blundell v. Pope (N. J. Err. & App.) 21 A. 456. The case of Merritt v. Merritt, 43 N. J. Eq. 11, 10 A. 835, seems to be authority for this court to now require the setting apart in a trust fund of sufficient securities (including ......
  • Liberty Title & Trust Co. v. Stevens
    • United States
    • New Jersey Court of Chancery
    • March 24, 1934
    ...in cases such as this is not upon mistake either in law or fact on their part, but on the theory of accident. In Merritt v. Merritt, 43 N. J. Eq. 11, 10 A. 835, the court dealt with the question of a deficiency of moneys invested to provide an annuity, and in this case it appeared that when......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT