Colby v. Cate

Supreme Court of New Hampshire

Colby v. Cate

23 A. 529, 65 N.H. 667

Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Colby v. Cate. Read the opinion of the Court — 64 N.H. 476 →

Supreme Court of New Hampshire·Decided December 5, 1888·Published

Opinion

Bingham, J.

It was decided in this case, 64 N. H. 476, that c. 41, Laws 1872, did not repeal Gen. St., c. 183, s. 7. This leaves the rights of Hepzibah Cate as if the act of 1872 had not been enacted, and her rights in the estate of her husband, she having waived the provisions made for her in his will, are as provided in section seven, above cited. No difficulty now appears to prevent going forward with the proceeding for partition. Hall v. Smith, 59 N. H. 315.

Case discharged.

Doe, C. J., was absent: Smith and Clark, JJ., did not sit: the others concurred.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Bingham, J.

It was decided in this case, 64 N. H. 476, that c. 41, Laws 1872, did not repeal Gen. St., c. 183, s. 7. This leaves the rights of Hepzibah Cate as if the act of 1872 had not been enacted, and her rights in the estate of her husband, she having waived the provisions made for her in his will, are as provided in section seven, above cited. No difficulty now appears to prevent going forward with the proceeding for partition. Hall v. Smith, 59 N. H. 315.

Case discharged.

Doe, C. J., was absent: Smith and Clark, JJ., did not sit: the others concurred.

Colby v. Cate, 23 A. 529, 65 N.H. 667 (N.H. 1888).

Pincite

23 A. 529 (Colby v. Cate) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related