Εικόνες σελίδας
PDF
Ηλεκτρ. έκδοση

of the making and executing the said alleged writing, purporting to be the last will and testament of the said Nathan Cronk, he, the said Nathan Cronk, was so afflicted by reason of the infirmities of age, by sickness and disease, that he was incompetent to make and execute a valid will and testament, and so remained until the time of his de

cease.

The defendant, further answering the said complaint, says, that as to the charge therein contained, that no executors were named by the testator in said his will, that no letters testamentary or of administration have been issued from the Surrogate's Court of the county of Albany upon the estate of the alleged testator, and that the will of the said testator has not been proven in the Surrogate's Court of the county of Albany, for the reason that the same could not, after the most diligent and thorough search, be found, he, the said defendant, has not sufficient knowledge or information to be able to form a belief, and therefore he denies the same.

The defendant, for a further answer, says, that as to the charge in the plaintiff's complaint contained, that the said will is lost by accident, or that the same has been destroyed by design by some person or persons interested in defeating the operation of the said bequest of $1,500 in the said plaintiff's favor, he, the said defendant, has not sufficient knowledge or information to be able to form a belief, and therefore he denies the same.

The defendant, further answering, denies that the personal property of said Nathan Cronk was more than sufficient to pay all his debts.1

'The answer contained various formal admissions of allegations in the complaint, which are omitted, as such admissions are altogether unnecessary. (Ante, p. 29, note.)

Wherefore the said defendant says, that this court should not take proof of the execution and validity of said will, or establish such will as the last will and testament of the said Nathan Cronk, or give to the said plaintiff any other or further judgment in the premises.'

W. V. CARMAN,

Defendant's Attorney..

(No. 52.)

Answer in a partition suit, where the defendants are numerous and some of them unknown, by one defendant, as well for himself as for all other heirs.2

Title of the Cause.

The defendant, John Slingerland, as well in behalf of himself as of all other persons similarly situate, and heirs of said Abraham Slingerland, deceased, for answer to the plaintiff's complaint in this action ; 3

First. Denies, as defendant is informed and believes, that said plaintiffs, John V. Fox and Ralph B. Fox, under the provisions of the will of said Sarah Fox, or otherwise, have become or are seized in fee simple, or that their wives have an inchoate right of dower in the share or shares of the premises mentioned in said complaint, claimed by said plaintiff: and denies absolutely that said plaintiffs are or ever were possessed of the same or any part thereof.

1 This argument or inference from the denials in the answer is also unnecessary and superfluous.

2 To Complaint No. 54, Part II., ante, p. 241.

3 The provision of section 119 of the Code, which allows one or more parties to defend for the whole in cases where the question is one of a common or general interest of many persons, or when the parties are very numerous, and it may be impracticable to bring them all before the court, is properly applicable to such a case as this. (See ante, note, pp. 414-416.)

Second. The defendant, on like information and belief, denies, that the respective shares and quantity of interest in said premises of the heirs of Albert Slingerland, deceased (of whom defendant is one), and of Peter Slingerland, deceased, are as set forth by plaintiff in said complaint; but on the contrary he alleges, that said heirs of said Albert are collectively seized of one-half, and the heirs of said Peter of one-half of said premises, subject to the said charge of $500, created by the said will of Abraham Slingerland, deceased.1

(No. 53.)

Answer of infants, by their guardian, in a partition case.2 SUPREME COURT.

George N. Sharp
agt.

Susanna Bouton, Nathaniel Crosby, [and others, naming them.]

The separate answers of Jane White and Helen White, two of the defendants in the above action, by Neilson Forsyth, duly appointed their guardian in this action by an order of this court, made at Special Term, on, &c., at, &c.:

That said defendants are infants, under the age of twenty-one, and are strangers to all and singular the allegations set forth in said complaint, and have no knowledge

1 The answer, it will be observed, denies the allegation of seizin of the plaintiffs', claiming, as they do, under an ante nuptial settlement, and the will of a married woman. The settlement, will, &c., that is the whole title of the plaintiffs being set forth, the question might also be raised by demurrer.

2 To Complaint No. 53, Part II., ante, p. 235.

or information thereof sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of said allegations.

And said defendants submit their rights and interest in the premises to the judgment and protection of the court. N. FORSYTH,

Guardian ad litem of said infants.

(No. 54.)

Answer of one of the defendants, a devisee under a will, to a complaint brought by an executor for a construction of the will.1

SUPREME COURT.

Daniel Clint, executor, etc., of the last will and testament of John Clint, deceased,

agt.

Magdalen Clint, John S. Clint and Emeline his wife, and others.

The separate answer of Dewitt Clint, one of the defendants in the above entitled action, alleges:

That he is the person mentioned in the will and codicil set forth in the complaint, and is the son of the said John Clint, deceased; that at the time of the death of the said John Clint, this defendant resided with his father, the said John Clint, with whom he had previously resided all his life, and that he assisted the said John Clint in working his farm.

This defendant further says, that for a short time previous to the time of making said codicil to said will, he, this defendant, was paying his addresses to a young lady

1 To Complaint No. 43, Part II., ante, p. 196.

in the vicinity, and this defendant alleges, that this, and this alone, was the "course of conduct" pursued by him, this defendant, which is referred to in the said codicil as being "very grievous" to the testator and to the mother of this defendant.

And defendant alleges and states, that previous to the death of said testator, he, the defendant, ceased to pay his addresses to the person above mentioned, and referred to in said codicil as the object which caused the necessity thereof, and that he did entirely desist and abandon such object in the lifetime of the said testator, and to the full satisfaction of him, the testator, and did make the satisfaction to the said testator in his lifetime, and the mother of defendant, contemplated and required by said codicil, and that defendant has always well continued and still continues to desist from and abandon the said object, as well to the satisfaction of said testator in his lifetime, as to the mother of this defendant. This defendant, therefore, claims that he was and is fully reinstated, in all respects, in his rights as a legatee and devisee under said last will and testament, the same as though said codicil had never been made.

And this defendant asks the judgment of this court, that he may be so declared and adjudged reinstated in such rights. He also joins in the prayer of the plaintiff for a full construction of said will, and upon the first point of construction asked in said complaint, this defendart claims and insists, and asks, that by the judgment of the court, it be declared that the whole of said codicil, or so much thereof as relates to any change or modification in the bequests and devises mentioned and made in said will to said defendant, and the provision in said codicil in lieu thereof, are inoperative and of no effect and void, for the reasons or some of them mentioned

« ΠροηγούμενηΣυνέχεια »