Zillmer v. Landguth

69 N.W. 568, 94 Wis. 607, 1896 Wisc. LEXIS 215
CourtWisconsin Supreme Court
DecidedDecember 15, 1896
StatusPublished
Cited by12 cases

This text of 69 N.W. 568 (Zillmer v. Landguth) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Wisconsin Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Zillmer v. Landguth, 69 N.W. 568, 94 Wis. 607, 1896 Wisc. LEXIS 215 (Wis. 1896).

Opinion

Winslow, J.

Under the will, before us, an estate in fee simple was devised to the two daughters in undivided'moieties, by apt and technical words, with a condition annexed to the effect that the devisees should not convey the same; •or, in other words, that all power of alienation should be absolutely suspended for a fixed period. We regard this •condition as void, because absolutely repugnant to the estate granted. It now seems well settled that, when a conveyance or devise is made in fee, a condition attémpted to be annexed thereto to the effect that the purchaser or dev-isee shall not for any period of time convey or alien the estate is void for repugnancy. Potter v. Couch, 141 U. S. 296; Mandelbaum v. McDonell, 29 Mich. 78; Allen v. Craft, 109 Ind. 476; Conger v. Lowe, 124 Ind. 368; Todd v. Sawyer, 147 Mass. 570; De Peyster v. Michael, 6 N. Y. 467; Van Horne v. Campbell, 100 N. Y. 287; Schouler, Wills, § 602. See, upon this subject generally, Saxton v. Webber, 83 Wis. 617; Van Osdell v. Champion, 89 Wis. 661. The daughter lizzie, therefore, took a fee-simple estate, and mould lawfully devise the same.

By the Court.— Judgment affirmed.

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

Related

Beauchamp v. Beauchamp
574 So. 2d 18 (Mississippi Supreme Court, 1990)
Estate of Budd v. Hansen
105 N.W.2d 358 (Wisconsin Supreme Court, 1960)
Janura v. Fencl
52 N.W.2d 144 (Wisconsin Supreme Court, 1952)
Wrubel Realty Corp. v. Wrubel
48 A.2d 793 (New Jersey Court of Chancery, 1946)
Larson v. Sabby
247 N.W. 880 (Wisconsin Supreme Court, 1933)
Lowell v. Lowell
240 P. 280 (Arizona Supreme Court, 1925)
Stone v. Easter
1923 OK 850 (Supreme Court of Oklahoma, 1923)
Pattin v. Scott
112 A. 911 (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 1921)
Krueger v. Frederick
102 A. 697 (New Jersey Superior Court App Division, 1917)
Hause v. O'Leary
161 N.W. 392 (Supreme Court of Minnesota, 1917)
Danforth v. City of Oshkosh
97 N.W. 258 (Wisconsin Supreme Court, 1903)
In re Will of Kopmeier
89 N.W. 134 (Wisconsin Supreme Court, 1902)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
69 N.W. 568, 94 Wis. 607, 1896 Wisc. LEXIS 215, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/zillmer-v-landguth-wis-1896.