Dusenbury v. Smith — 90 N.Y.S. 1094

Majority

p. 1094

DUSENBURY, Respondent, v. SMITH et al., Appellants.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department.

October 14, 1904.)

Headnote

Action by Jennie J. Dusenbury against Millard F. Smith and others.

We think the trust deed executed by the plaintiff was void, not only because of the possible suspension of the absolute power of alienation for more than two lives, but also because the preliminary direction to retain the rents and profits of the real estate for the repayment to the trustees of the advances made by them to the plaintiff constitutes an unlawful accumulation of income. Killam v. Allen, 52 Barb. 605 , cited with approval in Underwood v. Curtis, 127 N. Y. 523 , 541, 28 N. E. 585 ; Hascall v. King, 162 N. Y. 134 , 56 N. E. 515 , 76 Am. St. Rep. 302 . Judgment affirmed without costs.

Cases cited

Killam v. Allen 52 Barb. 605 N.Y. Sup. Ct. 1868-11-02 p. 1094
Underwood v. Curtis 127 N. Y. 523 N.Y. 1891-10-06 at 541, 28 p. 1094
Hascall v. King 162 N. Y. 134 N.Y. 1900-02-27 p. 1094