Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

30 Ill. App. 48

Newell v. Montgomery

Appellate Court of Illinois

Decided January 16, 1889

Appellate Court of Illinois · decided 1889-01-16

<p>Administration—Trusts—Error without Prejudice.</p> <p>1. Upon petition to sell real estate on account of a deficiency of personal estate to pay debts, the Probate Court, having equity powers, will recognize a trust existing in favor of a third person.</p> <p>2. The appellant can not assign as error, action that does not prejudice his rights.</p>

Cited by 2 later decisions — most recently November 1892

2 state decisions

Relies on Wright v. Bishop

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1889-01-16

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

Gary, J.

¶2The deceased was a priest of the Roman Catholic Church, for many years pastor of a church in Ottawa, but died a resident of Chicago. The lot was once the property of one Robert Montgomery and was sold under a decree of the Circuit Court of La Salle county after his death, and, by friendly arrangement between the widow and Terry, was bought in by him.

¶3He had been fully reimbursed, and held the title only for her and her children; was always ready to convey to her, oías she might direct, but the business was neglected and he died holding the title in trust, with nothing in writing as evidence oí the trust, nor any circumstances from which the law could raise a resulting trust.

¶4Under the amendment of the administration act, approved June 15, 1887, the Probate Court has equity powers in cases of this class, and the practice is required to be as in cases in chancery. When the answer of Mrs. Montgomery came in, asserting the trust, there was no amendment of the petition setting up the statute of frauds in opposition to the trust. But if there had been, the court would not have been justified, in the exercise of its equitable powers, in enforcing a naked legal right against conscience. Browne, Statute of Frauds, Sec. 129.

¶5Whether there is any error in any other part of the decree than that dismissing the petition is a matter which does not concern the appellant. He can not assign as error, action that does not prejudice him. Wright v. Bishop, 88 Ill. 302.

¶6Decree affirmed.

/30/illapp/48 · .json · Public domain