 | Great Britain. Court of Chancery, John Herman Merivale - 1819 - 766 páginas
...say that the property must not be applied to purposes however so benevolent, unless they also come within the technical denomination of charitable purposes...is too indefinite for the Court to execute. I see DO substantial difference between this case and the former, and therefore consider the point as already... | |
 | Leonard Shelford - 1836 - 1090 páginas
...benevolent, unless they also came within the technical denomination of charitable purposes. And as it might consistently with the will be applied to other than strictly charitable purposes, the trust was too indefinite for the court to execute. (u) 10 Ves. 543. See9Ves. 399; ante, p. 85. See Vezey... | |
 | Great Britain. Court of Chancery, Charles Beavan - 1844 - 726 páginas
...integrity and discretion should agree on, and Sir William Grant held it void, saying, " If the property might, consistently with the will, be applied to other...trust is too indefinite for the Court to execute." Again, in Ommanney v. Butcher (c), Sir Thomas Plumer held that a bequest for private charity was void... | |
 | James Hill - 1845 - 704 páginas
...he is bound so to apply it" (<>). And in another case the same learned judge says, " If the property might consistently with the will be applied to other,...trust is too indefinite for the court to execute" ( p). Thus in Coxe \. Sattet (9), where a testator " authorized and empowered" his trustees, to continue... | |
 | Michigan. Supreme Court, Randolph Manning, George C. Gibbs, Thomas McIntyre Cooley, Elijah W. Meddaugh, William Jennison, Hovey K. Clarke, Hoyt Post, Henry Allen Chaney, William Dudley Fuller, John Adams Brooks, Marquis B. Eaton, Herschel Bouton Lazell, James M. Reasoner, Richard W. Cooper - 1874 - 664 páginas
...whether he is bound so to apply it." And in James v. Allen, 3 Mer., 17, he says further: "If the property might, consistently with the will, be applied to other...trust is too indefinite for the court to execute."— See also Ellis v. Selby, 1 Myl. & C., ATIOKKRY GlUBBAL t> . 8 OVLB . If the ambiguity involves the... | |
 | Great Britain. Court of Chancery, Charles Beavan - 1852 - 718 páginas
...Morice (a) \ Moore.s PCC p. 293. 1851. M»riec v. The Bishop of Durkam (a); and if the property iright, consistently with the will, be applied to other than strictly charitable purposes, the trust i;< too indefinite for the Court to execute ; James v. Allen (A). The cases of gifts to a country,... | |
 | New Jersey. Court of Chancery - 1870 - 628 páginas
...benevolence is also an object of his charity." The ground of the decision was, that as the bequest could, consistently with the will, be applied to other than strictly charitable purposes, the court could not execute the trust. In Williams v. Kerskaw, 5 Clark $ Fin. Ill, note, the devise was... | |
 | 1916 - 1326 páginas
..." ; and another observation of the same learned Judge in James v. Atten(5) : " If it [the property] might consistently with the " will be applied to other...trust is too indefinite for the Court to execute." I have referred to EUis v. Selby(2) because it seems to me to answer the suggestion that upon the principle... | |
 | 1896 - 830 páginas
...be applied to purposes, however benevolent, unless they aloo come within the technical denominations of charitable purposes. If it might, consistently...trust is too indefinite for the court to execute." It was held that the gift was invalid. In Kendall v. Granger the bequest was to be applied for amongst... | |
| |
If it might, consistently with the will, be applied to other than strictly charitable purposes, the trust is too indefinite for the Court to execute. 
