Page:Harvard Law Review Volume 5.djvu/263

RECENT CASES. 247 Statute of Frauds — Agreement not to be Performed within a Year. — An oral agreement upon sufficient consideration by an agent of the payee of a note, to extend the time of payment for more than a year, is not within the Statute of Frauds, where the payor executed his part of the agreement by the payment of the considera- tion. Grace v. Lynch, 49 N. W. Rep. 751 (Wis.). Statute of Frauds — Assumption of Debt of Third Person. — A pur- chaser who accepts a conveyance of real property, reciting that there is a mortgage lien thereon, which the purchaser assumes to pay, cannot avoid the payment of such lien by a claim that it was an oral promise to pay the debt of another, and so void by the Statute of Frauds. Neiswanger v. McClellan, 26 Pac. Rep. 18 (Kan.). Statutes — Mechanics' Lien — Materials. — Lumber sold to a sub-contractor on a railway, for the erection of shanties for his employees and stables for his teams, is not within the statute giving a lien for labor performed or materials furnished in the construction, repair, and equipment of the railroad, and gives no right of action against the railway company. Stewart Chute Lumber Co. v. Missouri Pac. Ry. Co., 49 N. W. Rep. 769 (Neb.). Trusts — Limitations of Actions. — The use by a guardian of his ward's money, after the latter has reached his majority, in purchasing land in his own name, is an appropriation of the money to his own use, and a repudiation of the ward's right as cestui que trust, whereon a cause of action at once arises, against which the Statute of Limitations begins to run. Potter v. Douglas, 48 N. W. Rep. 1004 (la.). Trusts — Parol Agreement — Statute of Frauds. — Where A conveys land to B pursuant to an oral agreement that B shall sell the same and pay the proceeds to A, a parol trust only attaches to the money received if the land is sold, and, if con- firmed by'B after the sale, may be enforced at law. But the right to enforce the agreement dies with B, and the lands so held descend to his heirs unincumbered by any trust, as such parol agreement is void under the Statute of Frauds. Collar v. Collar, 49 N. W. Rep. 551 (Mich.). Trusts — Policy for Benefit of Wife — Murder of Insured by Wife. — Where a man insures his life for benefit of wife by virtue of the Married Woman's Act, a trust is thereby created in favor of the wife. If, therefore, the wife murders the insured, his executors cannot maintain an action on the policy against the insurers, such an action being for the benefit of the wife, and it being contrary to public policy that she should profit by her crime. The question whether or not she knew of the existence of the policy before she committed the murder is immaterial. Cleaver v. Mutual Reserve Fund Life Association, 39 Weekly Reporter 638. Usury — Payment — Action to Recover. — Where a debtor has paid a note tainted with usury, he cannot maintain an action to recover back the usurious interest. Plain v. Willson, 49 N. W. Rep. 224 (Neb.). Will — Charitable Gift — Lapse — Cy-pres. — A charitable bequest to an institution which comes to an end after the death of the testator, but before the legacy is paid, does not fail for the benefit of the residuary legatee. The property falls to the Crown, which will apply it for some analogous purpose of charity. In re Slevin, [1891] 2 Ch. 236.