Citation network
Mcarthur Vs. Scott
Cites for this judgment
- US Supreme Court
- Mar 02, 1885
Citation network · 7-day free trial
Brief every cited case in minutes
Open an 18-section AI Brief on any citation below, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial - no card required.
- 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
- Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
- Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
- Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases
No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account
-
U.S. 340 (1885) U.S. Supreme Court McArthur v. ScottSearch
-
U.S. 340 (1885) McArthur v. ScottSearch
-
if the parties were citizens of different states, bring their suit in the Circuit Court of the United States. Holt v. LambSearch
-
and to hold until the final division or partition, clearly gave them an estate in fee, to last until that time. Doe v. EdlinSearch
-
Maden v. TaylorSearch
-
were annexed to their office of executors, and did not make them trustees in another and different capacity. Colt v. ColtSearch
-
Treadwell v. CordisSearch
-
Gandolfo v. WalkerSearch
-
created, the great-grandchildren Page 113 U. S. 379 would be immediately entitled to the remainder. Castle v. EateSearch
-
Manfield v. DugardSearch
-
Wall. 458, 73 U. S. Moore v. LyonsSearch
-
Blanchard v. BlanchardSearch
-
Brief any citation in this list with AI Studio
-
have been often held to be vested from the death of the testator. Bullock v. DownesSearch
-
Mortimore v. MortimoreSearch
-
Parker v. ConverseSearch
-
Dove v. TorrSearch
-
Mass. 38. The case of Thorndike v. LoringSearch
-
of course, be ascertained until the determination of the particular estate by the death of their parents. Doe v. ConsidineSearch
-
Dingley v. DingleySearch
-
Doe v. ProvoostSearch
-
Linton v. LaycockSearch
-
Doe v. PerrynSearch
-
Randoll v. DoeSearch
-
that personal property shall be divided at the expiration of an estate for life creates a vested interest. Shattuck v. StedmanSearch
-
Hallifax v. WilsonSearch
-
Strother v. DuttonSearch
-
gift is to divest the share of any grandchild deceased leaving issue, and to vest that share in such issue. Smithers v. WillockSearch
-
Goodier v. JohnsonSearch
-
Darling v. BlanchardSearch
-
previous gift, and the general intent of the testator, as appearing from the whole will, require to be vested. Hall v. TuftsSearch
-
of facts at the time of the testator's death, though differing from that existing at the date of the will. Williams v. TealeSearch
-
Cattlin v. BrownSearch
-
of which may possibly not take within the Page 113 U. S. 383 prescribed period, is wholly void. Leake v. RobinsonSearch
-
Pearks v. MoseleySearch
-
and are twenty-one years in gross, without regard to the life or to the coming of age of any person soever. Cadell v. PalmerSearch
-
of a person in being when the testator died. See Stevenson v. EvansSearch
-
Turley v. TurleySearch
-
of a vested remainder to the grandchildren, nor alter the share which each living grandchild would take. Cattlin v. BrownSearch
-
Lord Selborne, in Pearks v. MoseleySearch
-
and has no authority to pass upon the question whether the devises in the will are void for remoteness. Mears v. MearsSearch
-
by the statute, no answer is necessary, and, if one is filed, it cannot be read at the trial of the issue. Green v. GreenSearch
-
and if some of the heirs are made plaintiffs and some defendants, all have an equal right to contest the will. Runyan v. PriceSearch
-
Bradford v. AndrewsSearch
-
equity is so far in the nature of an appeal from the original probate that the same issue is to be tried anew. Haynes v. HaynesSearch
-
The original probate cannot be impeached, except in the form of proceeding given by the statute. Swazey's Heirs v. BlackmanSearch
-
Bailey v. BaileySearch
-
U.S. Supreme Court McArthur v. ScottSearch
AI Brief on cited cases - 7-day free trial