Howard's Practice Reports in the Supreme Court and Court of Appeals of the State of New York

Digest.

not invalidate the decision and selection made by the majority. (Id.)

3. Where a direct authority to sell the testator's real estate was given to the executors, and the entire will showed that the testator's intention was that the real estate should be converted into money for the purpose of consummating his gifts:

Held, that there is an equitable conversion. (Id.)

4. Where a testatrix gave the income arising from her estate to her four daughters for life in certain proportions, and gave the principal of her estate, after the deaths of her daughters, respectively, to her grandchildren in certain proportions, and afterwards, by a codicil to her will, directed that her daughters "shall share equally and alike in the proceeds or income of her estate:"

Held, that the change wrought by the codicil with respect to the participation by the daughters in the income, did not disturb the 3. gifts over to the grandchildren, or affect the portions they took under the will. (Weld agt. Strong, ante, 133.)

5. The term " proceeds" used in the codicil, held, not to relate to the proceeds to be realized upon a sale of the corpus of the estate, but that it was the equivalent for the word "income." (Id.)

6. To warrant the conclusion that the testatrix intended by the codicil to change the shares of the grandchildren, language should have been used clearly to effectuate such change. (Id.)

7. After making certain gifts out of her estate, including an annuity of $300 to her daughter Mary for life, the testatrix gave and devised all the rest and residue of her estate, after the payment of debts, &c., unto her executors in trust, &c.:

The fact that the witness was arrested in another action, with which the plaintiff is in no way connected, and gave bail, does not continue his privilege. (Id.)

A complaint alleged that one Rodgers died, leaving a will by which he devised certain real estate to his son J. Rodgers, subject to an estate for life therein of his widow, and to the payment of certain legacies; that J. Rodgers paid the legacies, bought the life estate, entered into possession of the land, and subsequently conveyed the same to the plaintiff, who is now in possession thereof; that, after the death of the widow, a sister of J. Rodgers, one of the defendants herein, claimed that the devise to him was void, for the reason that he was one of the two subscribing witnesses to the will, and that she was entitled to an undivided one-sixth of the land. The plaintiff asked that his title be declared valid, and that if this were not done, that a partition and sale of the premises might be had.

Held, that the action was one in equity, to establish the validity of

Digest.

a will of real estate conclusively 5. A resident of a foreign state,

4. The plaintiff in error was tried alone upon an indictment in which he was jointly indicted with one Butts; the latter had never been 1. arraigned, nor had a nolle prosequi been entered as to him. Upon the trial Butts was called as a witness on behalf of the people; no formal motion that he be admitted as a witness on their behalf having been made. Counsel for the plaintiff in error objected that he was not a competent witness, having been jointly indicted with the plaintiff in error for the offense with which the latter was charged. Held, that the objection was properly overruled and his testimony admissible. (Taylor agt. People, 12 Hun, 212.)

while attending a court of this state as a witness, cannot be served with a process for the commencement of a civil action against him. (Person agt. Grier, 66 N. Y., 124.)

As to whether a distinction in respect to their immunity exists as to suitors and witnesses from a foreign state, and those residing in this state, quære. (Id.)

WRIT OF ERROR.

Where a judgment against the accused in a criminal action is reversed by the general term upon a writ of error, solely upon the ground of an irregularity therein, and in the sentence; and the proceedings are remitted to the trial court to pronounce a proper sentence and judgment, error will not lie to this court at the suit of the plaintiff in error below. must await a final judgment, and for errors other than that upon which he succeeded he must seek his remedy, if any, by another writ of error. (Pratt agt. People, 67 N. Y., 606.)