History
  • No items yet
midpage
Piper v. Piper
2 N.H. 439
Superior Court of New Hampshir...
1822
Check Treatment
By the court.

The real question in this case is, whether the principal could maintain an action against the trustee to recover the legacy given to the principal in the will of Mary Bennett; for if he could, the trustee is chargeable ; otherwise not. It seems now to be well settled* that an action lies to recover a legacy charged upon lands. 1 Chitty’s Pl. 91.—7 John. 99, Sucker vs. Bucher.—10 ditto 30, Orders vs. Orders.—2 Salk. 415, Ewer vs. Jones.—2 Ld. Ray. 936, S. C.—6 Mod. Rep. 26, S. C.—4 Mass. Rep. 634, Tarwell vs. Jacobs.

We are therefore of opinion, that the trustee must be charged.

Case Details

Case Name: Piper v. Piper
Court Name: Superior Court of New Hampshire
Date Published: Feb 15, 1822
Citation: 2 N.H. 439
AI-generated responses must be verified and are not legal advice.
Your Notebook is empty. To add cases, bookmark them from your search, or select Add Cases to extract citations from a PDF or a block of text.