BRYANT v. KLATT


2 F.2d 167 (1924)

BRYANT v. KLATT et al.

District Court, S. D. New York.

On Reargument, July 28, 1924.


Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Paul M. Crandell, of New York City, for plaintiff.

James E. Smyth, of Brooklyn, N. Y., for defendant Klatt.


LEARNED HAND, District Judge (after stating the facts as above).

I am satisfied that this old gentleman had no intention of conveying the beneficial interest in his property from himself to his sons, but that the deed was a device of an incompetent lawyer to protect him against his son-in-law. It is true that, in the nature of things, the evidence could not be disputed, but it is antecedently probable in itself. It is not likely that he meant to strip himself of his...

Let's get started

Leagle.com

Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.

  • Updated daily.
  • Uncompromising quality.
  • Complete, Accurate, Current.

Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.

Cited Cases

  • No Cases Found

Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.

Citing Cases