Citation network
Potter Vs. Couch
Cites for this judgment
- US Supreme Court
- May 25, 1891
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. 296 (1891) U.S. Supreme Court Potter v. CouchSearch
-
U.S. 296 (1891) Potter v. CouchSearch
-
an estate in fee depends upon the requirements of the trust, and not upon the insertion of words of inheritance. Doe v. CosidineSearch
-
Kirkland v. CoxSearch
-
standing alone, affect the time of vesting of the legal title in the shares of the brother and the nephew. Wellford v. SnyderSearch
-
therefore their trust estate could not terminate until they had made the division and conveyed the shares. McArthur v. ScottSearch
-
to do so is a question not presented by this record. The decision of the Supreme Court of Illinois in Kirkland v. CoxSearch
-
Brief any citation in this list with AI Studio
-
The cases cited against this conclusion differ widely from the case at bar. The two most relied on were Minors v. BattisonSearch
-
peculiar, and there was much diversity of opinion among the judges before whom it was successively brought, and Manice v. ManiceSearch
-
in the brother and in the nephew, respectively, from the death of Page 141 U. S. 314 the testator. Copley v. CooperSearch
-
Phipps v. AckersSearch
-
Weston v. WestonSearch
-
Nicoll v. ScottSearch
-
Scofield v. OlcottSearch
-
before), the title, legal and equitable, in the whole estate would be vested in persons capable of conveying it. Waldo v. CummingsSearch
-
Lunt v. LuntSearch
-
McDonogh v. MurdochSearch
-
over, in case the first devisee shall alien, is equally void whether the estate be legal or equitable. Howard v. CarusiSearch
-
Ware v. CannSearch
-
Shaw v. FordSearch
-
Corbett v. CorbettSearch
-
Steib v. WhiteheadSearch
-
Kelley v. MeinsSearch
-
estate devised to the first taker, by depriving him during that time of the inherent power of alienation. Roosevelt v. ThurmanSearch
-
Mandlebaum v. McDonellSearch
-
Page 141 U. S. 316 Anderson v. CarySearch
-
Twitty v. CampSearch
-
but upon peculiar bequests of slaves at times and places at which they were considered personal property. Smith v. BellSearch
-
How. 1. In Smith v. BellSearch
-
Pet. 31 U. S. 84 . In Williams v. AshSearch
-
turned upon the local law, and appears to have been so understood by the court of appeals of the state in Steuart v. WilliamsSearch
-
citing Doe v. HawkeSearch
-
of the entire interest, legal or equitable, even in personalty, is clearly contrary to the authorities. Bradley v. PeixotoSearch
-
Lovett v. GillenderSearch
-
that income bequeathed to a person for life shall not be liable for his debts, such as was discussed in Nichols v. LevySearch
-
in Nichols v. EatonSearch
-
U. S. 716 , and in Spindle v. ShreveSearch
-
U. S. 542 . In Steib v. WhiteheadSearch
-
Meacham v. SteeleSearch
-
Kellogg v. HaleSearch
-
Baker v. CopenbargerSearch
-
Thomas v. EckardSearch
AI Brief on cited cases - 7-day free trial