In re Durscheidt's Estate

New York Supreme Court

In re Durscheidt's Estate

19 N.Y.S. 973, 72 N.Y. Sup. Ct. 136, 47 N.Y. St. Rep. 419, 65 Hun 136

CourtNew York Supreme Court

DecidedJuly 22, 1892

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 19 N.Y.S. 973 (In re Durscheidt's Estate) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New York Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

In re Durscheidt's Estate, 19 N.Y.S. 973, 72 N.Y. Sup. Ct. 136, 47 N.Y. St. Rep. 419, 65 Hun 136 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1892).

Pincite

Opinion

Barnard, P. J.

The testator left a very small estate, consisting of furniture of the value of $50, and $614 -cash. He left a widow. The appraisers set apart the furniture of deceased for the use of the widow, and also set apart for her $150 in cash, under chapter 157, Laws 1842. The words of this act provide the exemption in favor of the widow to be “necessary household furniture, provisions, or other personal property” of the value of not over $150. The court of appeals in Re Frazer, 92 N. Y. 239, held that, when the-husband gave all the household property to his wife, the $150 exemption could be given out of other personal property. The question is thus narrowed to this: whether money is “personal property,” within the meaning of this statute. It has been so held by surrogate’s court. Lyendecker v. Eisemann, 3 Dem. Sur. 72. In general signification, the bank book was personal property. The law intended to give an exemption, in addition to specific articles named, to this amount, ($150,) and it should be construed so as to carry out the benign intent of the legislature. The order should be affirmed, with costs and. disbursements.

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

Barnard, P. J.

The testator left a very small estate, consisting of furniture of the value of $50, and $614 -cash. He left a widow. The appraisers set apart the furniture of deceased for the use of the widow, and also set apart for her $150 in cash, under chapter 157, Laws 1842. The words of this act provide the exemption in favor of the widow to be “necessary household furniture, provisions, or other personal property” of the value of not over $150. The court of appeals in Re Frazer, 92 N. Y. 239, held that, when the-husband gave all the household property to his wife, the $150 exemption could be given out of other personal property. The question is thus narrowed to this: whether money is “personal property,” within the meaning of this statute. It has been so held by surrogate’s court. Lyendecker v. Eisemann, 3 Dem. Sur. 72. In general signification, the bank book was personal property. The law intended to give an exemption, in addition to specific articles named, to this amount, ($150,) and it should be construed so as to carry out the benign intent of the legislature. The order should be affirmed, with costs and. disbursements.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

19 N.Y.S. 973, 72 N.Y. Sup. Ct. 136, 47 N.Y. St. Rep. 419, 65 Hun 136, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-durscheidts-estate-nysupct-1892.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack