In re Clark

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re Clark

249 A.D. 845, 293 N.Y.S. 30, 1937 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9970

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

DecidedJanuary 22, 1937

StatusPublished

This text of 249 A.D. 845 (In re Clark) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

In re Clark, 249 A.D. 845, 293 N.Y.S. 30, 1937 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9970 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1937).

Pincite

Opinion

In a proceeding brought by the surviving spouse for the determination of the validity and effect of her election to take her intestate share against the provisions of the decedent’s will, decree of the Surrogate’s Court of Kings county unanimously affirmed, with costs to respondent, payable out of the estate. We are of opinion that the addition of subdivision (h) to section 18 of the Decedent Estate Law (Laws of 1936, chap. 234, in effect April 3, 1936) did not deprive the respondent, the surviving spouse, of her right of election against a will, exercised prior to the amendment, which will, in part at least, is coneededly within the contemplation of the decision in Matter of Curley (245 App. Div. 255; affd., 269 N. Y. 548). (Matter of Bommer, 159 Misc. 511.) Present — Lazansky, P. J., Hagarty, Adel and Taylor, JJ.; Johnston, J., not voting.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

In a proceeding brought by the surviving spouse for the determination of the validity and effect of her election to take her intestate share against the provisions of the decedent’s will, decree of the Surrogate’s Court of Kings county unanimously affirmed, with costs to respondent, payable out of the estate. We are of opinion that the addition of subdivision (h) to section 18 of the Decedent Estate Law (Laws of 1936, chap. 234, in effect April 3, 1936) did not deprive the respondent, the surviving spouse, of her right of election against a will, exercised prior to the amendment, which will, in part at least, is coneededly within the contemplation of the decision in Matter of Curley (245 App. Div. 255; affd., 269 N. Y. 548). (Matter of Bommer, 159 Misc. 511.) Present — Lazansky, P. J., Hagarty, Adel and Taylor, JJ.; Johnston, J., not voting.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

249 A.D. 845, 293 N.Y.S. 30, 1937 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9970, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-clark-nyappdiv-1937.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack