In Re Estate of Pfizer

110 A.2d 54, 17 N.J. 40
CourtSupreme Court of New Jersey
DecidedDecember 13, 1954
StatusPublished
Cited by2 cases

This text of 110 A.2d 54 (In Re Estate of Pfizer) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of New Jersey primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
In Re Estate of Pfizer, 110 A.2d 54, 17 N.J. 40 (N.J. 1954).

Opinion

17 N.J. 40 (1954)
110 A.2d 54

IN THE MATTER OF THE ESTATE OF EMILE PFIZER, DECEASED.
ALBERT A. TEETER AND NATIONAL CITY BANK OF NEW YORK, TRUSTEES UNDER THE LAST WILL AND TESTAMENT OF EMILE PFIZER, DECEASED, PLAINTIFFS-RESPONDENTS,
v.
OLIVER DUNCAN, AS EXECUTOR OF THE WILL OF HELEN DUNCAN, ET AL., DEFENDANTS-APPELLANTS, CROSS-RESPONDENTS, AND THE CITY OF NEW YORK, ETC., AND ASSOCIATION FOR THE AID OF CRIPPLED CHILDREN, DEFENDANTS-RESPONDENTS, CROSS-APPELLANTS, AND THE PRESBYTERIAN HOSPITAL IN THE CITY OF NEW YORK, ET AL., DEFENDANTS-RESPONDENTS.

The Supreme Court of New Jersey.

Argued December 6, 1954.
Decided December 13, 1954.

Mr. Harrison F. Durand argued the cause for the appellants, cross-respondents (Mr. Doane Twombly of counsel).

Mr. Frederick K. Hopkins argued the cause for the respondents, cross-appellants (Messrs. Hopkins, Vorburger and Dickson, attorneys).

Mr. Ronald A. Gulick argued the cause for the respondents.

PER CURIAM.

The judgment of the Chancery Division of the Superior Court is affirmed as to the matters appealed from *41 for the reasons expressed in the opinion filed in that court by Judge Ewart and reported at 33 N.J. Super. 242.

We find no merit in the cross-appeal from the award of counsel fees. The trustees raised the question of the construction of the will in their complaint and there was clearly reasonable doubt as to its meaning. We affirm the trial court's decision on this point.

For affirmance — Chief Justice VANDERBILT, and Justices HEHER, OLIPHANT, WACHENFELD, BURLING, JACOBS and BRENNAN — 7.

For reversal — None.

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

Related

In re the Settlement of the Accounts of Unanue
605 A.2d 279 (New Jersey Superior Court App Division, 1991)
Pennoyer v. Taxation Division Director
5 N.J. Tax 386 (New Jersey Tax Court, 1983)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
110 A.2d 54, 17 N.J. 40, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-estate-of-pfizer-nj-1954.