In re Folger

New York Court of Chancery

In re Folger

4 Johns. Ch. 169, 1819 N.Y. LEXIS 179, 1819 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 32

CourtNew York Court of Chancery

DecidedNovember 12, 1819

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 4 Johns. Ch. 169 (In re Folger) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New York Court of Chancery primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

In re Folger, 4 Johns. Ch. 169, 1819 N.Y. LEXIS 179, 1819 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 32 (N.Y. 1819).

Pincite

Opinion

The Chancellor.

In the case ex parte Ward, (6 Ves. 579.) a groundless petition by a stranger, for a traverse, was dismissed with costs. So, where the heir filed a bill to set aside a will- on the ground of the testator’s insanity, [170]*170and failed, he was ordered by Lord Hardwicke, in Webb v. Claverden, (2 Atk. 423.) to pay costs. It would appear, from the case of White v. Wilson, (13 Ves. 87.) that when die heir demands an issue to try the testator’s sanity, and fails, he will be ordered to pay costs, if he sets up insanity as a pretext. The question of costs is discretionary, and depends upon the character of the application, and the conduct of the party.

In the present case a relation of the lunatic had procured a deed .from him, while a lunatic, and his interest in establishing that deed, and not concern or humanity for the lunatic, was, probably, the motive for the traverse of the inquisition. He was struggling for his own advantage ; and it is just and reasonable that he should pay the costs to which he has, without just ground, and in furtherance of his claim, subjected the estate of the lunatic.

Ordered, that T. F. pay the costs to be levred

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

The Chancellor.

In the case ex parte Ward, (6 Ves. 579.) a groundless petition by a stranger, for a traverse, was dismissed with costs. So, where the heir filed a bill to set aside a will- on the ground of the testator’s insanity, [170]*170and failed, he was ordered by Lord Hardwicke, in Webb v. Claverden, (2 Atk. 423.) to pay costs. It would appear, from the case of White v. Wilson, (13 Ves. 87.) that when die heir demands an issue to try the testator’s sanity, and fails, he will be ordered to pay costs, if he sets up insanity as a pretext. The question of costs is discretionary, and depends upon the character of the application, and the conduct of the party.

In the present case a relation of the lunatic had procured a deed .from him, while a lunatic, and his interest in establishing that deed, and not concern or humanity for the lunatic, was, probably, the motive for the traverse of the inquisition. He was struggling for his own advantage ; and it is just and reasonable that he should pay the costs to which he has, without just ground, and in furtherance of his claim, subjected the estate of the lunatic.

Ordered, that T. F. pay the costs to be levred

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

4 Johns. Ch. 169, 1819 N.Y. LEXIS 179, 1819 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 32, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-folger-nychanct-1819.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack