The Portland daily press., 1898-11-30

| Law Term--WeStern District.
Tuesday-The following decisions with
rescriprs were received by Clerk of Courts
Stone yes terday from the law court:
Androscoggin, IS.
| Dora i. Morgan VS.. Sophie Martin.
l. Rescript, Strout, ] "A married aoman
cannot maintain an action against an
other woman for alienation of the affec-
tions of the husband of the former. Elk
eeptions overruied
| Somerset, SIS.
Aminie A. Brooks VS.. Llewellyn Morrill,.
/; Rescript, Whitehouse, j. lin an action
| to recover damages for an injury received
\ by the falling of limb from tree over
hanging the sidewalk, it appeared that
| the defendants land. opposite the tree,
was bounded con the west line'' Of a
highway which was built nearly four rods
outside of the recorded location.
| Held. that the true boundary line OF
| the defendants land was the exterior
| limit of the road that was wrought and
| in actual use for travel, and not the
s'west line of an invisible and un-
wrought location.
| As the contrary rule was given to the
| Jury. and the defendants evidence tend
ed clearly to show that the tree in ques-
ton was within the limi s of the travel
| led road and not ON the defendants land,
| the entry must be. Exceptions sustained.
| Knox, SIS.
William II. Fogler. Admir-, in Eq.. VS..
BENZ. Titoom ct ais, and Silas W. Mo
Loon. ct ais.
Rescript Whitehouse, J.-It ia not diff
Quilt to discover that the dominant idea
pervading the will OF William 81. Tit
comb is that his wife should have the use
and control. during her lifetime. of all
the testator s property not specifically
bequeathed by him, and the power to dis
pose of the residue by will as freely as If
it were part of her own estate. If she
failed to exercise the privilege thus given
her, such residue was to continue a part
of his estate and descend to his heirs as
intestate property.
The personal property now in the hands
Of the plaintiff as administrator, after
deducting such expenses Aas have neces-
sarily been incurred by him in the prose
cution of this suit, and such reasonable
counsel fees therein as may be allowed to
him by the judge of probate, should be
H. Titcomb, who are entitled to costs
against the heirs of Mary q. Titcomb
Decree according to rascript.
John W. Green ct ais, VS.. William 6.
Alden.
Rescript. Whitehouse, 1.-THE testa-
tors will was executed and allowed il
conformity With the laws or New ! 0rk,
but having only two attesting witnesses.
it is not in accordance with the laws of
Maine. 1t was duly allowed and record
ed, however. in the State Of Maine, in
the county where the demanded promises
are situated, and under the provisions of
our statutes as construed in Lyon VS.
Ogden. IS Me-, 374, the devise in ques-
tion was effectual and operative in Civ
ing to the trustees named valid titlt
to the demanded premises for the purpose
of the trust described. They were not
required to have letters testamentary is
sued TO them, or to qualify as executors
by giving bond, in this state, in order
to make q valid transfer of their title.
In makin that conveyance they We're not
In fact acting as executors, but as donees
of trust power in whom the legal title
had been vested by act of a testator hav-
ing his domicil in New York where their
account was to be settled.
The copy of the will and of the probate
in New York was not recorded in this
state until long after the conveyance OF
the demanded premises by the trustees,
but it is setgled law in this state, that
in such case the estate of tho devisees
would vest by relation back to the time
of the death of the testator and not to the
time of filing the will.
The tax title set up by the defendant is
manifestly defective for reasons stated in
the opinion Judgment for plaintiffs.