Case Name: Stephen P. Tregoning, Resp't v. Richard F. Tregoning et al., App'lts
Court: New York Supreme Court, General Term
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 1891-06-26
Citations: 39 N.Y. St. Rep. 426
Docket Number: 
Parties: Stephen P. Tregoning, Resp’t v. Richard F. Tregoning et al., App’lts.
Judges: 
Reporter: New York State Reporter
Volume: 39
Pages: 426–426

Head Matter:
Stephen P. Tregoning, Resp’t v. Richard F. Tregoning et al., App’lts.
(Supreme Court, General Term, First Department,
Filed June 26, 1891.)
Deed—Construction of—Vested remainders.
A deed read “ and the parties of the first part hereby grant and convey said premises in fee to said children of P. and M., subject to the life estate of said M. as above stated.” Held, that the children of P. and M., who -were alive at the delivery of the deed, took vested remainders in fee.
, Appeals from interlocutory judgments of the special term, overruling demurrers interposed by the defendants, John C. Devine and Michael J. Devine.
Abram Kling, for app’lts ; James A. O'Gorman, for resp’t.

Opinion:
Per Curiam.
—We think it entirely clear that the children of Patrick and Margaret Devine, who were alive at the time of the delivery of the deed in question, took vested remainders. The language of the deed admits of no doubt upon this head. Nothing could be plainer than the expression " And the parties of the first part hereby grant and convey said premises in fee to said children of Patrick and Margaret Devine, subject to the life estate of said Margaret Devine as above stated."
The cases are all one way on this question, and the opinion of Lawrence, J., at special term is entirely satisfactory.
The interlocutory judgments appealed from should be affirmed, with costs.
Yan Brunt, P. J., Patterson and Barrett, JJ., concur.