Talk:Cy-près doctrine: Difference between revisions
Spelling of cy pres |
→Edits on Jackson v. Phillips: new section |
||
| Line 11: | Line 11: | ||
American law tends to spell the term "cy pres", with no hyphen or accent grave. This is the usage in Black's and the Phillips case discussed in the main article. I'm inclined to change the spelling unless someone points out a reason not to. |
American law tends to spell the term "cy pres", with no hyphen or accent grave. This is the usage in Black's and the Phillips case discussed in the main article. I'm inclined to change the spelling unless someone points out a reason not to. |
||
[[User:Thewimsey|Thewimsey]] ([[User talk:Thewimsey|talk]]) 19:04, 6 May 2012 (UTC) |
[[User:Thewimsey|Thewimsey]] ([[User talk:Thewimsey|talk]]) 19:04, 6 May 2012 (UTC) |
||
== Edits on Jackson v. Phillips == |
|||
I have read the decision ([http://masscases.com/cases/sjc/96/96mass539.html]), and corrected an error in the lead. |
|||
Francis Jackson's will, so it turns out, has two bequests: a $1,000 bequest for the propagation of abolitionism, and a $200 one for the benefit of fugitive slaves. Both bequests were at issue in this case, but the court applied cy-pres slightly differently. The first bequest was changed to "paid by them from time to time to an association already established, to promote the education, support and interests of the freedmen, lately slaves, in those states in which slavery had been so abolished, to be expended for that object"; while the second bequest was changed to, due to its smaller amount, "the use of necessitous persons of African descent in the city of Boston and its vicinity, preference being given to such as had escaped from slavery."--[[User:Samuel Curtis|<font color="blue">Samuel</font>]] di [[User Talk:Samuel Curtis|<font color="red">Curtisi</font>]] di [[Special:Contributions/Samuel_Curtis|<font color="green">Salvadori</font>]] 21:33, 4 April 2014 (UTC) |
|||
Revision as of 21:33, 4 April 2014
 | Law Start‑class Low‑importance | |||||||||
| ||||||||||
Section 112.054(b) of the Texas Property Code authorizes the court to modify the terms of the trust in order to conform the terms to the intent of the settlor "as nearly as possible. The statute can be found at
http://www.capitol.state.tx.us/statutes/docs/PR/content/htm/pr.009.00.000112.00.htm#112.054.00
Presumbably, the statutes of most states have similar authority.
Spelling
American law tends to spell the term "cy pres", with no hyphen or accent grave. This is the usage in Black's and the Phillips case discussed in the main article. I'm inclined to change the spelling unless someone points out a reason not to. Thewimsey (talk) 19:04, 6 May 2012 (UTC)
Edits on Jackson v. Phillips
I have read the decision ([1]), and corrected an error in the lead.
Francis Jackson's will, so it turns out, has two bequests: a $1,000 bequest for the propagation of abolitionism, and a $200 one for the benefit of fugitive slaves. Both bequests were at issue in this case, but the court applied cy-pres slightly differently. The first bequest was changed to "paid by them from time to time to an association already established, to promote the education, support and interests of the freedmen, lately slaves, in those states in which slavery had been so abolished, to be expended for that object"; while the second bequest was changed to, due to its smaller amount, "the use of necessitous persons of African descent in the city of Boston and its vicinity, preference being given to such as had escaped from slavery."--Samuel di Curtisi di Salvadori 21:33, 4 April 2014 (UTC)