In re Windle

2 Edw. Ch. 585, 1836 N.Y. LEXIS 246, 1836 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 12
New York Court of Chancery·Decided April 27, 1836·Published

Opinion

That in or about the month of February, in the year one thousand eight hundred and twenty-five, your Petitioner, having monies of his own, arising [586] from his own earnings, agreed to purchase and did purchase from C. D., the fee simple of all those three certain lots of A groun(I situate &c. &c. And your Petitioner further shews that he purchased the same, subject to the unexpired term of a certain lease, theretofore executed by the said C. D. to A. R. S. bearing date the first day of May one thousand eight hundred and twenty for the term of seven years; and the same lease was given up to your Petitioner, as the purchaser, by the said C. D. and has remained in your Petitioner’s possession ever since. That William Slosson, Esquire, was, at that time, the professional adviser of the said C. D. and your petitioner also left it with tha said William Slosson to make out the title for your Petitioner and do ail that was needful so as to have the said ground and premises vested in your Petitioner: But your Petitioner shews that at that time, yet after your Petitioner had purchased the property, it occurred to the mind of the said Mr. Slosson that your Petitioner might not have obtained his citizenship—and having ascertained that such really was the case, the said Mr. Slosson advised your Petitioner to have the said ground and premises conveyed from the said C. D. to your Petitioner’s then wife, Sarah Martha Windle, a native born American. That your Petitioner was guided by such advice; and the same ground and premises were conveyed in fee by the said C. D. and S. his wife to your Petitioner’s said wife, Sarah Martha Windle, by deed bearing date the nineteenth day of February one thousand eight hundred and twenty-five and which was recorded in the office of the Register of the city and county of New-York in Liber 187 of Conveyances, page 456; and which deed is and always has been in your Petitioner’s possession. And your Petitioner further shews, that it wTas a part condition of the said purchase that a mortgage should be given for part of the consideration money, namely, for the sum of one thousand nine hundred and fifty dollars and interest; that such bond was made out in your Petitioner’s own name alone and executed by him and afterwards fully satisfied out of your Petitioner’s own private funds; and also a mortgage of the premises was likewise made out in the name of your Petitioner ahd his said wife—and which said bond and mortgage are in your [587] Petitioner’s possession. And your Petitioner further shews that the consideration moneys for the said deed and premises, namely, two thousand eight hundred dollars, were the proper and private monies of your Petitioner; and your Petitioner’s said wile, Sarah Martha Windle, in no way contributed to such purchase, nor did any of her money, estate or effects go towards such consideration. And your Petitioner further shews that he has also, out of his own private funds and earnings, expended in buildings upon the said ground and premises, at least the sum of ten thousand dollars; and has, uncontrolled, at all times, since the said period of purchasing, let the said premises and received the rents as his own and applied the same to his own business and purposes. And your Petitioner further shews, that after such purchase, and on the twenty-third day of February, one thousand eight hundred and twenty-seven, your Petitioner became a citizen of the United States of America ; and now holds considerable real estate in his own name and he is a resident Merchant of the city of New-York: but your Petitioner neglected from time to .time to have such ground and premises hereinbefore described passed from your Petitioner’s said wife to your Petitioner; and it has so happened that your Petitioner’s said wife, Sarah Martha Windle, is now dead, also the said William Slosson, Esquire, is dead —as well as the commissioner who took the acknowledgment of the said deed, namely, Robert L. Wilson, Esquire— But for all this your Petitioner hopes to be enabled to prove sufficient, under the circumstances, to satisfy this Honorable court that your Petitioner ought to have the legal estate in the ground and premises aforesaid vested in him and which he is anxious to have done, in order that he may have the uncontrolled possession and legal and equitable fee of and in the said ground and premises. And your Petitioner further shews, that the said Sarah Martha Windle had the following living children by your Petitioner, namely, G. B. W. aged sixteen years, J. B. W. aged fourteen years, and E. B. W. aged eleven years.

[588] Your Petitioner therefore prays that it may be referred to one of the masters of this court, residing in the city of New York, to take testimony, not only as to material facts directly mentioned in the said petition or such of them as are in the power of your Petitioner to prove, but also of corroborating circumstances which would go to show that the said ground and premises were purchased with your Petitioner’s own funds and that your Petitioner ought to have the legal and equitable fee of the same vested in him ; and, if agreeable to the rules and practice of this court, that your Petitioner be examined, touching the said premises, before the said master; and that a special guardian ad litem be appointed for the said infants, who shall appear on the said reference and watch their rights and interests, if any they have. And so that, upon the coming in of the said Master’s report, provided such report be in favor of your Petitioner and of his petition, that an order or decree be entered declaring that your Petitioner shall have the legal and equitable fee in the said ground and premises without further consideration; and that your Petitioner’s said infant children, G. B. W., J. B. W. and E, B. W. be declared trustees for your Petitioner in the premises and be directed to convey the said ground and premises to your Petitioner, under the hand and approval of the said master—or for such other or further order as this court, under the circumstances, may see fit to grant and as may be agreeable to equity. And &c.

Thereupon, the following order was entered:

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

In re Windle, 2 Edw. Ch. 585, 1836 N.Y. LEXIS 246, 1836 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 12 (N.Y. 1836).

2 Edw. Ch. 585 (In re Windle) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.