 | 1843 - 506 strani
...of limitations are those technical and continuing trusts which are not cognizable at law, but fall within the proper, peculiar, and exclusive jurisdiction of a court of equity. Finney v. Cochran, 1 Watts & Sergeant, 112. MASTER AND SERVANT. (Criminal n/ence.) Faithful service... | |
 | New Jersey. Court of Chancery - 1879 - 846 strani
...not apply to actions founded on a direct or strict trust, such as are not cognizable at law, but fall within the proper, peculiar and exclusive jurisdiction of a court of equity. This is the rule as stated Partridge v. Wells. by Chancellor Kent (Kane v. Bloidgood, 7 Johns. Ch.... | |
 | Pennsylvania. Supreme Court, Frederick Watts, Henry Jonathan Sergeant - 1842 - 614 strani
...of limitations are those technical and continuing trusts which are not cognizable at law, but fall within the proper, peculiar, and exclusive jurisdiction of a court of equity. If a joint suit be brought against two obligors, one of whom dies pending the action, and the plaintiff... | |
 | Georgia. Supreme Court - 1850 - 688 strani
...be said, that this is a case of a direct trust, purely technical, not cognizable at law, but falling within the proper, peculiar and exclusive jurisdiction of a Court of Equity; and, consequently, one not subject to the presumption of satisfaction or payment or waiver. 2 Mylne If Kecne,... | |
 | Georgia. Supreme Court - 1850 - 660 strani
...action. [16.] This being a case of direct and purely technical trust, not cognizable at law, but falling within the proper, peculiar and exclusive jurisdiction of a Court of Equity, is not subject to the Statute of Limitations. [17.] On a motion to dismiss a bill for mint of equity,... | |
 | John Barnard Byles - 1853 - 664 strani
...122. Trusts which are not barred are those continuing trusts which are not cognisable at law, but fall within the proper, peculiar and exclusive jurisdiction of a court of equity. Finney v. Cockran, 1 Watts & Serg- 112. (2) An acknowledgment by an executor or administrator will... | |
 | Joseph Kinnicut Angell - 1861 - 724 strani
...continuing trusts to which we have already referred, and •which arc not cognizable at law, but fall within the proper, peculiar, and exclusive jurisdiction of a court of equity. In all cases of trusts, he makes it appear, that, whether or not they are affected by that statute... | |
 | Joseph Kinnicut Angell - 1876 - 772 strani
...continuing trusts to which we have already referred, and which are not cognizable at law, but fall within the proper, peculiar, and exclusive jurisdiction of a court of equity. In all cases of trusts, he makes it appear, that, whether or not they are affected by that statute... | |
 | Seymour Dwight Thompson - 1879 - 584 strani
...view that such a case is one of "direct trust, purely technical, not cognizable at law, but falling within the proper, peculiar, and exclusive jurisdiction of a court of equity ; and, consequently, one not subject to the presumption of payment, or satisfaction, or waiver."' The Supreme... | |
 | John Hoff Stewart - 1879 - 826 strani
...not apply to actions founded on a direct or strict trust, such as are not cognizable at law, but fall within the proper, peculiar and exclusive jurisdiction of a court of equity. This is the rule as stated Partridge v. Wells. by Chancellor Kent (Kane v. Blo-xfyood, 7 Johns. Ch.... | |
| |
That there are euch trusts is well recognized; but it is equally well settled that trusts of this character are those technical and continuing trusts which are not recognized at law, but fall within the proper, peculiar, and exclusive jurisdiction of... 
