Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

1 Yeates 427

Roe v. Humphreys

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Decided January 15, 1795

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · decided 1795-01-15

Ejectment for lands in Delaware county, tried at the last May assizes at Chester before M’Kean C. J. and Yeates J. A verdict had passed… Held: that it is not necessary to hold inquisitions in the case where life estates have been seized in execution, because of the uncertain *ty of their duration; and the same principle [-*400 extends to reversions and remainders where they de- *- pend on life estates, because no one can ascertain the period of their commencement, and the…

Cited by 1 later decisions — most recently January 1833

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1795-01-15

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

By the court.

¶1This may possibly be a hard case, but we cannot help it. The words* “lands, tenements and heredi-‘1 taments ’ ’ mentioned in the act of 4 Ann. will surely comprehend the defendant’s interest in these lands before the life estates fell in, and such has been the uniform usage under it. The law was made to answer the purposes of a commercial people, and to secure the payment of just debts, and meant to comprehend all possible titles contingent, or otherwise, in lands, where there was a real intérest, but not such as that of an heir apparent. If a different construction prevailed, any one-by carving his real property into estates tail, might protect them against his children’s debts. It may also be re-*4801 mar^e^) that though the purchasers *have got a good J bargain, yet it might have so happened, that by the defendant’s dying before the. two first devisees for life, they might have lost their money.

¶2Judgment pro quer. per tot. cur.

/1/yeates/427 · .json · Public domain