Gaullaher v. Gaullaher

5 Watts 200
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania·Decided May 15, 1836·Published·Cited by 3 cases

Opinion

Per Curiam.

The principle involved here was discussed in Hoge v. Hoge, 1 Watts 163, where a devise on the faith of a devisee’s promise to dispose of the land for the benefit of the testator’s illegitimate son, was held to raise a trust. There is nothing like noncupation in Such a case; and the principle of it is equally applicable to a bequest of chattels. Here the defendant’s intestate had pledged his promise to pay 5000 dollars in lieu of an intended bequest of the same amount to the testator’s brother; and had not legal securities been given, chancery would have declared the promissor a trustee. But promissory notes having been given, the only question that Could arise, stands on the consideration; and it would be strange if a moral obligation, sufficient to raise a trust, were not sufficient to sustain a promise.

Judgment affirmed.

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

Gaullaher v. Gaullaher, 5 Watts 200 (Pa. 1836).

5 Watts 200 (Gaullaher v. Gaullaher) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Carver v. Todd
48 N.J. Eq. 102 (New Jersey Court of Chancery, 1891)
Williams v. Vreeland
32 N.J. Eq. 135 (New Jersey Court of Chancery, 1880)
Donnally v. Ryan
41 Pa. 306 (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 1862)