In James v. Du Bois, 16 N.J.L. 285, the court refers only briefly to the constitutional point, and explains its holding by stating that the statute relating to estates-tail "only regulates the future descent of property without disturbing the existing and vested rights of any one."
Summary of this case from Green v. EdwardsJune Term, 1899.
Order affirmed on argument, with ten dollars costs and disbursements.
In James v. Du Bois, 16 N.J.L. 285, the court refers only briefly to the constitutional point, and explains its holding by stating that the statute relating to estates-tail "only regulates the future descent of property without disturbing the existing and vested rights of any one."
Summary of this case from Green v. EdwardsFull title:James Du Bois, Appellant, v. The City of New York, Respondent
Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Date published: Jun 1, 1899
In re Paschal, 77 U.S. (10 Wall.) 483, 19 L. Ed. 992. Where an attorney has been discharged he having been…
Green v. EdwardsClarke v. Cordis, 4 Allen (Mass.), 466, does not in any way concern an estate-tail, and only incidentally…