Mingay v. Lackey

New York Supreme Court

Mingay v. Lackey

26 N.Y.S. 161, 74 Hun 89, 81 N.Y. Sup. Ct. 89, 57 N.Y. St. Rep. 270

DecidedDecember 1, 1893

StatusPublished

This text of 26 N.Y.S. 161 (Mingay v. Lackey) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New York Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Mingay v. Lackey, 26 N.Y.S. 161, 74 Hun 89, 81 N.Y. Sup. Ct. 89, 57 N.Y. St. Rep. 270 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1893).

Pincite

Opinion

PRATT, J.

The interlocutory judgment did not divest the estate by curtesy. That existed and was fully enjoyed till the death of the life tenant. The object of paying a gross sum to the life tenant out of the proceeds of the sale is to indemnify the life tenant for the estate of which he is to be deprived by the partition sale and the conveyance under it. As the life tenant died before the sale took place, the life estate thus extinguished can no longer be the subject of sale, and the provisions of the interlocutory judgment relating thereto were properly expunged by amending the judgment. Mulford v. Hiers, 13 N. J. Eq. 13, is a case of dower, but the principle is applicable here. Order appealed from affirmed, with costs.

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

PRATT, J.

The interlocutory judgment did not divest the estate by curtesy. That existed and was fully enjoyed till the death of the life tenant. The object of paying a gross sum to the life tenant out of the proceeds of the sale is to indemnify the life tenant for the estate of which he is to be deprived by the partition sale and the conveyance under it. As the life tenant died before the sale took place, the life estate thus extinguished can no longer be the subject of sale, and the provisions of the interlocutory judgment relating thereto were properly expunged by amending the judgment. Mulford v. Hiers, 13 N. J. Eq. 13, is a case of dower, but the principle is applicable here. Order appealed from affirmed, with costs.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

26 N.Y.S. 161, 74 Hun 89, 81 N.Y. Sup. Ct. 89, 57 N.Y. St. Rep. 270, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mingay-v-lackey-nysupct-1893.