In re Determining the Validity of the Right of Election in the Estate of Hearn

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re Determining the Validity of the Right of Election in the Estate of Hearn

261 A.D. 924, 25 N.Y.S.2d 758, 1941 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8108

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

DecidedFebruary 18, 1941

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 261 A.D. 924 (In re Determining the Validity of the Right of Election in the Estate of Hearn) 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 Determining the Validity of the Right of Election in the Estate of Hearn, 261 A.D. 924, 25 N.Y.S.2d 758, 1941 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8108 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1941).

Pincite

Opinion

Decree of the Surrogate’s Court, Queens County, entered after trial by the court [925]*925without a jury, adjudging that the notice of election filed by the appellant, surviving husband, under section 18, Decedent Estate Law, is invalid, and that the appellant is not entitled to share in the decedent’s estate, reversed on the law and the facts, with costs to all parties filing briefs, payable out of the estate, and the matter remitted to the Surrogate’s Court for entry of a decree accordingly. Abandonment was not an issue in the case, and, in any event, was not established by the evidence. (Thompson v. Thompson, 163 Misc. 946; affd., 254 App. Div. 601.) The only issue was whether the execution of the separation agreement of February 10, 1938, operates to deprive the surviving spouse of the right of election under section 18, Decedent Estate Law. The instrument has no such effect, as it was not acknowledged in accordance with subdivision 9 of the statute, (Matter of McGlone, 284 N. Y. 527, decided December 31, 1940; Matter of Israel, 149 Misc. 620.) Lazansky, P. J., Carswell, Johnston, Adel and Close, JJ., concur.

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

Decree of the Surrogate’s Court, Queens County, entered after trial by the court [925]*925without a jury, adjudging that the notice of election filed by the appellant, surviving husband, under section 18, Decedent Estate Law, is invalid, and that the appellant is not entitled to share in the decedent’s estate, reversed on the law and the facts, with costs to all parties filing briefs, payable out of the estate, and the matter remitted to the Surrogate’s Court for entry of a decree accordingly. Abandonment was not an issue in the case, and, in any event, was not established by the evidence. (Thompson v. Thompson, 163 Misc. 946; affd., 254 App. Div. 601.) The only issue was whether the execution of the separation agreement of February 10, 1938, operates to deprive the surviving spouse of the right of election under section 18, Decedent Estate Law. The instrument has no such effect, as it was not acknowledged in accordance with subdivision 9 of the statute, (Matter of McGlone, 284 N. Y. 527, decided December 31, 1940; Matter of Israel, 149 Misc. 620.) Lazansky, P. J., Carswell, Johnston, Adel and Close, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

261 A.D. 924, 25 N.Y.S.2d 758, 1941 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8108, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-determining-the-validity-of-the-right-of-election-in-the-estate-of-nyappdiv-1941.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack