Pink v. Church

New York Supreme Court

Pink v. Church

14 N.Y.S. 337, 38 N.Y. St. Rep. 735, 60 Hun 580, 1891 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 1979

CourtNew York Supreme Court

DecidedMay 11, 1891

StatusPublished

Cited by7 cases

This text of 14 N.Y.S. 337 (Pink v. Church) 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

Pink v. Church, 14 N.Y.S. 337, 38 N.Y. St. Rep. 735, 60 Hun 580, 1891 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 1979 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1891).

Pincite

Opinion

Pratt, J.

The proof is decisive that the deceased regarded plaintiff as his-son, had brought him up as such, intended to provide for his future as for that of a son, and had put aside the bonds in suit as such a provision for him. The only question is whether he succeeded in so putting his intentions into acts that the law can carry them into effect. An examination of the testimony shows that he informed the plaintiff of his intention to give him the bonds, told him where they were deposited, and gave him the key by which to gain possession of them. The jury were charged that if the key was given with intent to transfer a present title to the bonds, it effected the purpose. There can be noquestion of the correctness of the law thus laid down. There are no questions that require discussion, and the verdict is fully sustained by the testimony. Judgment affirmed, with costs.

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

Pratt, J.

The proof is decisive that the deceased regarded plaintiff as his-son, had brought him up as such, intended to provide for his future as for that of a son, and had put aside the bonds in suit as such a provision for him. The only question is whether he succeeded in so putting his intentions into acts that the law can carry them into effect. An examination of the testimony shows that he informed the plaintiff of his intention to give him the bonds, told him where they were deposited, and gave him the key by which to gain possession of them. The jury were charged that if the key was given with intent to transfer a present title to the bonds, it effected the purpose. There can be noquestion of the correctness of the law thus laid down. There are no questions that require discussion, and the verdict is fully sustained by the testimony. Judgment affirmed, with costs.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

14 N.Y.S. 337, 38 N.Y. St. Rep. 735, 60 Hun 580, 1891 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 1979, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/pink-v-church-nysupct-1891.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack