Wooster v. Cooper
Decision Date | 09 March 1896 |
Citation | 53 N.J.E. 682,33 A. 1050 |
Parties | WOOSTER v. COOPER et al. |
Court | New Jersey Supreme Court |
(Syllabus by the Court.)
Appeal from court of chancery.
Suit by Charles I. Wooster against William T. Cooper and others. Decree for defendants, and plaintiff appeals. Affirmed.
John W. Wescott and John J. Crandall, for appellant.
William Moore and James Buchanan, for respondents.
GUMMERE, J. Benjamin D. Cooper died in the month of March, 1893, having made his last will on December 31, 1881, by which, among other things, he provided as follows: The will then directs a conversion of the estate into cash, and the distribution thereof among the respondents in this case. Testator's wife, Tacy, survived him, and, under the terms of his will, took possession and control of his entire estate, real and personal, and continued to possess and enjoy the same until her death, which occurred February 24, 1894. Testator's wife made no disposition of any portion of her husband's estate during her lifetime, but she left a will in and by which, after directing the payment of her debts and funeral expenses, she gave, bequeathed, and devised all her property, both real and personal, wherever situate and whatever the same might be, to her nephew Charles I. Wooster, the appellant in this case, to him and his heirs, forever. Under this last-mentioned will, the appellant claims to be entitled to the whole of the estate of Benjamin D. Cooper which was in the possession of his wife, Tacy, at her death; his insistment being that she was the absolute owner thereof by the terms of her husband's will, because there was coupled with the devise to her an absolute and unqualified power to dispose of the estate. The vice chancellor, by the decree appealed from, overruled this claim, and held that,...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Murdoch v. Murdoch
...71 N.J.L. 331, 60 A. 357; Wiley v. Gregory, 135 Ind. 657, 35 N.E. 507; Jackson v. Robins, 16 Johns. (N. Y.) 537; Wooster v. Cooper, 53 N. J. Eq. 682, 33 A. 1050; Funk v. Eggleston, 92 Ill. 515, 34 Am. Rep. Welsh, Adm'r, v. Woodbury, Adm'r, 114 Mass. 542, 11 N.E. 762; In re Foster's Will, 76......
-
Fox v. Snow
...had been to A for life, instead of generally and indefinitely, Pratt v. Douglas, 38 N.J.Eq. 516 (E. & A. 1884); Wooster v. Cooper, 53 N.J.Eq. 682, 33 A. 1050 (E. &. A. 1895); Weaver v. Patterson, 92 N.J.Eq. 170, 111 A. 506 (Ch.1920); Trafton v. Bainbridge, supra, 125 N.J.Eq. 474, 6 A.2d 209......
-
Gaston v. Ford
...of is valid and effective. Robeson v. Shotwell, 55 N. J. Eq. 322, 36 A. 780; Pratt v. Douglas, 38 N. J. Eq. 516; Wooster v. Cooper, 53 N. J. Eq. 382, 33 A. 1050; Weaver v. Patterson, 92 N. J. Eq. 170, 111 A. 506; Duncan v. Murphy, 92 N. J. 682, 114 A. 815. See, also, Tuerk v. Schueler, 71 N......
-
Mosgrove v. Mach
... ... 540, 106 So. 412. See notes to 2 A.L.R ... 1243; 27 A.L.R. 1381; 69 A.L.R. 825; Komp v. Thomas, ... 81 N.J.Eq. 103, 85 A. 815; Wooster v. Cooper, 53 ... N.J.Eq. 682, 33 A. 1050; Smith v. Bell, 31 U.S. 68, ... 6 Pet. 68, 8 L.Ed. 322; Brant v. Virginia Coal & Iron ... Co., 93 ... ...