¶1I concur in the result. I do not think that the courts will enforce a contract whereby a party deprives himself of all power to bequeath or devise by will the property of which he is the owner at death, except in cases of adoption, where the contract is made for the benefit of an infant, and not to the exclusion of children. It will certainly not do so in a case where the agreement is unilateral, and where it may be terminated by the other party at will.
19 N.Y.S. 332
Gall v. Gall
Decided June 3, 1892
New York Supreme Court · decided 1892-06-03
Action by Charles F. Gall against Amelia Gall and others to secure the •specific performance of an agreement made by Joseph Gall, deceased, to devise certain property to the plaintiff. From a judgment dismissing the complaint, plaintiff appeals.
Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know
Affirmed · Decided 1892-06-03
How this case has been cited
Cited by 5 later decisions — most recently April 1989
5 state decisions
Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.
View the full empirical analysis of this case →