← Cases

Geoffroy v. Schmidt

279 A.D. 912 Court N.Y. App. Div. Decision date 1952-03-03 English

Contents

Majority

p. 912
Eugene Geoffroy, Appellant, v. Marie Schmidt, Respondent.

There was neither limitation of time nor expressed contingency which might terminate the agreement not to seek partition and it was, therefore, against public policy in that the power to alienate was suspended for an unreasonable time. (Haeussler v. Missouri Iron Co., 110 Mo. 188 ; Shelby v. Shelby, 192 Ky. 304 ; 68 C. J. S., Partition, § 44, pp. 67-68.) Johnston, Adel, Wenzel and MacCrate, JJ., concur; Carswell, Acting P. J., concurs in result. [See post, p. 1010.]