From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Coffin v. Kelly

Court of Errors and Appeals
Sep 27, 1945
44 A.2d 29 (N.J. 1945)

Opinion

Submitted May 25, 1945 —

Decided September 27, 1945.

On appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court, whose opinion is reported in 131 N.J.L. 241.

For the prosecutor-appellant, Morrison, Lloyd Morrison ( Francis V.D. Lloyd).

For the defendant-respondent, Walter D. Van Riper, Attorney-General, and William A. Moore.


The judgment will be affirmed, for the reasons stated in the opinion filed in the court below by Chief Justice Brogan. That opinion appears to adopt the reasoning of the opinion in the Prerogative Court, 133 N.J. Eq. 188, as to the effect of the probable continuance of the period of enjoyment under the deeds of trust beyond the normal expectancy of life of the donor. We are left in some doubt as to whether the Vice-Ordinary regarded the creation of a trust to remain effective for a period beyond the probable duration of the life of the donor as creating a legal presumption that the transfer was made in contemplation of death. While the provisions of the trust in that and every other respect were a part of the body of proof from which the court was authorized to, and did, find the fact regarding the donor's intention, the likelihood of continued enjoyment by the beneficiaries of the donor's gifts for a period beyond the normal expectancy of life of the donor did not as a matter of law establish the transactions as transfers made in contemplation of death. It is important to distinguish between purely factual findings and findings that involve the applications of legal presumptions or other forms of legal principles. The practical bearing is that in such matters this court accepts without review a finding of fact made by the Supreme Court where there is evidence to sustain it, Dommerich v. Kelly, 132 N.J.L. 141 ; but a finding of law, or an application of a legal principle to a finding of fact, is, of course, reviewable by us. We understand that the basis of determination by both the Prerogative Court and the Supreme Court was a strict finding of the facts as such.

For affirmance — PARKER, CASE, DONGES, HEHER, PERSKIE, OLIPHANT, WELLS, RAFFERTY, DILL, FREUND, McGEEHAN, JJ. 11.

For reversal — None.


Summaries of

Coffin v. Kelly

Court of Errors and Appeals
Sep 27, 1945
44 A.2d 29 (N.J. 1945)
Case details for

Coffin v. Kelly

Case Details

Full title:C.W. FLOYD COFFIN, SOLE SURVIVING EXECUTOR OF THE LAST WILL AND TESTAMENT…

Court:Court of Errors and Appeals

Date published: Sep 27, 1945

Citations

44 A.2d 29 (N.J. 1945)
44 A.2d 29

Citing Cases

State v. Landano

We stress that the Law Division judge's conclusion regarding whether defendant sustained his burden of proof…

Schneider v. Zink

Coffin v. Kelly, 133 N.J. Eq. 188 (Prerog. 1943); affirmed 131 N.J.L. 241 (Sup.Ct. 1943); affirmed 133 N.J.L.…