Geoffroy v. Schmidt
Geoffroy v. Schmidt
279 A.D. 912; 110 N.Y.S.2d 576; 1952 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5287
Opinion of the Court
There was neither limitation of time nor expressed contingency which might terminate the agreement not to seek partition and it was, therefore, against public policy in that the power to alienate was suspended for an unreasonable time. (Haeussler v. Missouri Iron Co., 110 Mo. 188; Shelby v. Shelby, 192 Ky. 304; 68 C. J. S., Partition, § 44, pp. 67-68.) Johnston, Adel, Wenzel and MacCrate, JJ., concur; Carswell, Acting P. J., concurs in result. [See post, p. 1010.]
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.