Law v. Alley

29 A. 636, 67 N.H. 93
CourtSupreme Court of New Hampshire
DecidedDecember 5, 1891
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 29 A. 636 (Law v. Alley) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of New Hampshire primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Law v. Alley, 29 A. 636, 67 N.H. 93 (N.H. 1891).

Opinion

Clark, J.

In Peirce v. Burroughs, 58 N. H. 302, it is said that in the absence of all evidence on the question whether a certain fund or piece of property in the hands of an executor is capital, or income, the presumption of fact is that it is capital. The language of the court in that case is equally applicable to the facts of the present case : “ There being no evidence that the right to take new shares was property, or the proceeds of property earned by the corporations, or that it was in any sense income or profits, it is capital belonging to the remainder-men.”

Case discharged.

Chase, J., did not sit: the others concurred.

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

Related

Walker v. Walker
39 A. 432 (Supreme Court of New Hampshire, 1895)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
29 A. 636, 67 N.H. 93, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/law-v-alley-nh-1891.