The Hebrew University Association v. Nye
Connecticut Superior Court
223 A.2d 397 (1966)
Ethel S. Yahuda, wife of Abraham S. Yahuda, a Hebrew scholar, acquired ownership of her husband’s entire library after his death. Since Ethel and Abraham had spoken about establishing a research center in Israel, Ethel arranged to meet with officers of the Hebrew University in Jerusalem (the University) (plaintiff) regarding donating Abraham’s library to the University. While there, Ethel announced at a formal luncheon attended by University officials and the president of Israel, among others, that she was giving the library to the University. The next day Ethel approved a press release stating that she gave the library as a gift to the University. When Ethel made this announcement, she also gave the University a memorandum containing a list of the materials to be donated. Thereafter, Ethel referred to the library on several occasions as belonging to the University. Ethel began to catalogue the library materials and prepare them for shipping to Israel. Although Ethel expressed her intention to ship the library materials to the University by the end of the year in 1954, she did not deliver the library materials to the University before her death in early 1955. In her will, she left the bulk of her estate to a Hebrew charitable institution. The University brought an action against the executors of Ethel’s estate, Nye et al. (Executors) (defendants), seeking a declaratory judgment establishing ownership of the library and an injunction preventing the Executors from disposing of the library property. The trial court held that Ethel’s announcement at the luncheon was a declaration to hold the library in trust for the University. The Executors appealed to the Connecticut Supreme Court which reversed and remanded, holding that Ethel did not hold the library materials in trust for the University. On remand, the Connecticut Superior Court considered whether Ethel made a valid inter vivos gift of the library to the University.
Rule of Law
Holding and Reasoning (Parskey, J.)
What to do next…
Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.
You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 724,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Berkeley, and Northwestern—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.Unlock this case briefRead our student testimonials
Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.
Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students.Learn about our approachRead more about Quimbee
Here's why 724,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 45,600 briefs, keyed to 983 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.