Case ID: ny_56/html/0668-02.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "\n      Per Curiam\n    ", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Maria A. Collins, Appellant, v. Lorenzo D. Collins et al., Respondents.
    (Argued April 27, 1874;
    decided May 26, 1874.)
    This action was brought to compel a reconveyance of certain premises, formerly conveyed by plaintiff to defendant Lorenzo D. Collins.
    Isaac Collins, husband of plaintiff, purchased the property in question, which was a hotel, together with a large assortment of furniture therein, and caused it to be conveyed to plaintiff, his wife. He was engaged in making repairs when he was taken sick and died. He left the plaintiff, his widow, and four children, by a former wife, him surviving. Upon his death-bed, his property being incumbered, and he owing a large amount of debts, he requested defendant Lorenzo, his brother, to take charge of his business and the property after his death, manage the same and do the best possible therewith for the benefit of his wife and children, and he requested plaintiff to convey the property to his said brother for that purpose. After his death plaintiff conveyed the property as desired to said defendant, who, thereupon, took charge of the same, and advanced large sums of his own funds in discharging liens and incumbrances. The court below decided that plaintiff was not entitled to a reconveyance, but that, by the deed, defendant Lorenzo D. Collins became the owner in fee for the benefit of plaintiff and the children of the deceased; judgment was directed that the property be sold by a referee, and out of the proceeds Lorenzo D. Collins be reimbursed his advances, expenses' and disbursements, and also be allowed for his services; and that the residue be divided into five equal parts, one part to be paid to plaintiff and one to each of the children. Meld, that plaintiff had no right in the premises capable of assertion, either at law or in equity; and that she, at least, had no reason to complain of the judgment.
    
      A. Bingham for the appellant.
    
      Henry Smith for the respondents.
   Per Curiam

opinion for affirmance.

All concur.

Judgment affirmed.