Hall v. Smith

4 Citing cases

  1. Riverwood Commercial Prop's v. Cole

    138 N.H. 333 (N.H. 1994)   Cited 4 times
    Holding that granting various easements was insufficient as a matter of law to establish the grantor's adverse possession claim

    A widow's right to receive a statutory elective share in lieu of her dower and homestead rights was not exercisable against the individual pieces of property owned by her husband, but rather required a release of rights in all such property so that she could receive a one-third "portion of all the real estate" belonging to her husband. See PL 306:11 (1926); see also, e.g., McDonough, 84 N.H. at 229, 149 A. at 72; Hall v. Smith, 59 N.H. 315, 315-16 (1879). Reversed and remanded.

  2. Hayes v. Seavey

    69 N.H. 308 (N.H. 1898)   Cited 5 times

    Laws 1846, c. 327; 1860, c. 2342; 1865, c. 4080; G.S., c. 164; G.L., cc. 183, 202; P. S, cc. 176, 186, s. 1, 195; Seaver v. Adams, 66 N.H. 142, 143, and authorities cited; Cressey v. Wallace, 66 N.H. 566, 567. The husband's power of testamentary disposition being limited by his wife's statutory rights in his property upon his decease (Hall v. Smith, 59 N.H. 315), in conferring like authority upon her to dispose of her estate care was taken, until the Public Statutes, expressly to provide as to her will that "no such will shall impair the rights of the husband in such estate, or his rights to a distributive share thereof." G.L., c. 183, s. 11; G.S., c. 164, s. 12; Laws 1865, c. 4080, s. 2; 1860, c. 2342, s. 3; 1845, c. 236, s. 1. The omission from the Public Statutes of s. 11, c. 183 of the General Laws, conferring with this proviso testamentary power upon married women, and the addition instead thereof of the clause, "'Every person' shall be construed to include a married woman," to s. 1, c. 186, P. S, does not alter the law.

  3. Bartlett v. Hill

    45 A. 144 (N.H. 1897)   Cited 2 times

    She evidently understood that discretion would be exercised so as not to defeat her specific legacies. Hall v. Smith, 59 N.H. 315. As the real estate was appraised at $31,000, there would seem to be no difficulty in raising the funds required from a sale of a portion of the half of it which is not set off to the plaintiff as his share. Indeed, the proceeds of the sale of real estate already in the possession of the executors would seem to be sufficient to adjust all claims now outstanding against the estate, including the plaintiff's distributive share of the personal property.

  4. COLBY v. CATE

    23 A. 529 (N.H. 1888)

    It was decided in this case, 64 N.H. 476, that c. 41, Laws 1872, did not repeal Gen. St., c. 183, s. 7. This leaves the rights of Hepzibah Cate as if the act of 1872 had not been enacted, and her rights in the estate of her husband, she having waived the provisions made for her in his will, are as provided in section seven, above cited. No difficulty now appears to prevent going forward with the proceeding for partition. Hall v. Smith, 59 N.H. 315. Case discharged.