Schreyer v. Arendt
Opinion of the Court
This is a submission of a controversy upon agreed facts under section 1279 of the Code of Civil Procedure. Prom the submission it appears that in December, 1902, the plaintiff agreed in writing to convey to the defendant certain real estate in the city of Hew York in consideration of the defendant’s agreeing to convey to him certain other real estate in the same city—the title to both pieces to pass on the thirteenth of January following. Before the arrival of
At the time of the execution of this deed the grantor had three children, then minors, all of whom are now living, and. two still being under twenty-one years of age. Her husband, Austin Gibbins, died on the 6th of January, 1890, and she subsequently married one Guldenkirch,' and on the 4th of August, 1891, Lowery conveyed to her, under the name of Henrietta E. Guldenkirch, said real estate, and the conveyance contains the following recitals:
“ Whereas the party of the second part did, on or about the eighth day of July, 1889, grant and convey to the party of the first part the premises hereinafter mentioned in trust, * * * and whereas the party of the first part desires to resign and surrender such trust and to reconvey the premises hereinafter described to the party of the second part, and whereas the party of the second part hereto has notified the party of the first part that she has revoked and terminated said trust, How, Therefore, This Indenture Witnesseth,” etc.
Henrietta E. Guldenkirch died on the 16th of April, 1897, leaving a last will and testament, which was subsequently admitted to probate and letters testamentary issued to the executor therein named, who, under a power of sale contained in her will, conveyed such real estate to the plaintiff, and upon an accounting the act of the executor was approved and he was discharged as executor.
The foregoing' are all of the material facts necessary to be considered upon the question presented. The defendant contends that the plaintiff’s title is unmarketable, inasmuch as the trust created by Mrs. Gibbins in her deed-of July 8, 1889, has never been terminated, and that her executors, through whom the plaintiff claims, never had title; that on her death her children became seized of the premises and that the title to the same is now in them, while the plaintiff claims that the reconveyance by Lowery terminated the trust and reinvested the title in Mrs. Guldenkirch, and, therefore, he acquired a marketable title from her executors under the power of sale contained in her will.
We are of the opinion that a complete and final determination of the question submitted cannot be had without the presence of all of the children of Mrs. Guldenkirch, and for that reason we decline to
Van Brunt, P. J., Patterson, O’Brien and Ingraham, JJ., concurred.
Submission dismissed, without costs.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.