Rich v. Rich
This text of 113 Mass. 197 (Rich v. Rich) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
The widow of Atkins S. Rich took by his will a life estate only, with a power of sale, in a certain contingency, which was never executed. The reversion, not being devised by his will, vested in his heirs, subject to the contingency of the exercise of that power by the widow, or of a sale by his executor for the payment of debts. It does not appear that he left any debts, and no question of the mode of enforcing the rights of creditors arises in this case, or could affect the rights of these plaintiffs as against the widow or her administrator under the contract made by them with her. The conversion of the land into money was not made under any power given by the testator, but by the concurrent acts of the tenant for life and of the heirs at law. Upon her promise to pay the purchase money to them upon her death, they may therefore sue her administrator.
In Buttrick v. King, 7 Met. 20, the whole estate was sold under the power in the will, and in Varnum v. Meserve, 8 Allen, 158, under a power in a mortgage executed by the testator. Those cases are thus distinguished from the present.
Exceptions overruled
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
113 Mass. 197, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/rich-v-rich-mass-1873.