In re the Construction of the Will of Mangels

New York Surrogate's Court

In re the Construction of the Will of Mangels

17 Misc. 2d 451, 184 N.Y.S.2d 994, 1959 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 3895

CourtNew York Surrogate's Court

DecidedApril 17, 1959

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 17 Misc. 2d 451 (In re the Construction of the Will of Mangels) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New York Surrogate's Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

In re the Construction of the Will of Mangels, 17 Misc. 2d 451, 184 N.Y.S.2d 994, 1959 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 3895 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1959).

Pincite

Opinion

Edgar F. Hazelton, S.

In his homespun self-styled testament the testator provided: “I hereby give devise and bequeath to my Beloved daughter, Lillian Louise Kruse, the full use of all income from my business and real estate, stock and all other resources where so ever derived from, to be used by her during her natural life and at her death the same then to be.divided between my children as Lillian Louise Kruse sees fit to certain, children as I have explained to her, as follows: ”

Then follow the names of the seven other children.

[452]*452. Petitioner now seeks a construction of the aforesaid provision and a determination as to whether the purported power of appointment set forth therein is effective.

Section 135 of the Real Property Law defines a special power as one in which the persons or class of persons to whom the disposition of property is to be made, are designated. I find that under the provision of the will under consideration, the testator intended to and did confer a special power of appointment under which his daughter, Lillian Louise Kruse,- was empowered to dispose of the property therein mentioned among the testator’s other children in such manner as she might determine by her will. The qualification “ as I have explained to her ” is precatory in nature and is not binding upon the donee, who could exercise the power in favor of any or all of the persons designated. (Real Property Law, § 158.)

Settle decree on notice accordingly.

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

Edgar F. Hazelton, S.

In his homespun self-styled testament the testator provided: “I hereby give devise and bequeath to my Beloved daughter, Lillian Louise Kruse, the full use of all income from my business and real estate, stock and all other resources where so ever derived from, to be used by her during her natural life and at her death the same then to be.divided between my children as Lillian Louise Kruse sees fit to certain, children as I have explained to her, as follows: ”

Then follow the names of the seven other children.

[452]*452. Petitioner now seeks a construction of the aforesaid provision and a determination as to whether the purported power of appointment set forth therein is effective.

Section 135 of the Real Property Law defines a special power as one in which the persons or class of persons to whom the disposition of property is to be made, are designated. I find that under the provision of the will under consideration, the testator intended to and did confer a special power of appointment under which his daughter, Lillian Louise Kruse,- was empowered to dispose of the property therein mentioned among the testator’s other children in such manner as she might determine by her will. The qualification “ as I have explained to her ” is precatory in nature and is not binding upon the donee, who could exercise the power in favor of any or all of the persons designated. (Real Property Law, § 158.)

Settle decree on notice accordingly.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

17 Misc. 2d 451, 184 N.Y.S.2d 994, 1959 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 3895, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-the-construction-of-the-will-of-mangels-nysurct-1959.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack