This section contains the nature of the case and procedural background.

Berman wanted to leave some property to her niece, Seaver (P). Berman’s husband drew his wife’s will according to her instructions. It gave to P $1,000 and $500 to one sister, P’s mother, and $100 each to another sister and her son, the use of the house to her husband for life, and the remainder to the ASPCA. The husband was named as the residuary legatee and executor. When the will was read, Berman did not like it and wanted to leave the house to P. Berman's husband induced his dying wife to sign a will without making any changes, and he would leave P enough in his will to make up for the difference. The husband then avouched the promise by uplifting his hand. The husband died without taking care of P. P sued the executor of Mr. Berman's estate, Ransom (D), for a breach of Berman's promise to his dying wife. P got judgment on the theory that the husband had obtained the property from his wife and induced her to execute the will in the form prepared by him for the promise to give P $6,000, the value of the house, and that equity had thus impressed a trust in favor of P. When a legatee promises the testator that he will use property given in a will for a particular purpose a trust arises (Dudley, Ritch). The husband only got the use of the house. The lower courts found for P. D appealed.

The legal issues presented in this case will be displayed here.

The court's holding and decision will be displayed here.

Legal analysis from Dean's Law Dictionary will be displayed here.