Dusenbury v. Smith
This text of 90 N.Y.S. 1094 (Dusenbury v. Smith) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
We think the trust deed executed by the plaintiff was void, not only because of the possible suspension of the absolute power of alienation for more than two lives, but also because the preliminary direction to retain the rents and profits of the real estate for the repayment to the trustees of the advances made by them to the plaintiff constitutes an unlawful accumulation of income. Killam v. Allen, 52 Barb. 605, cited with approval in Underwood v. Curtis, 127 N. Y. 523, 541, 28 N. E. 585; Hascall v. King, 162 N. Y. 134, 56 N. E. 515, 76 Am. St. Rep. 302. Judgment affirmed without costs.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
90 N.Y.S. 1094, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/dusenbury-v-smith-nyappdiv-1904.