In re the Estate of Hawk

New York Surrogate's Court

In re the Estate of Hawk

6 Mills Surr. 133, 54 Misc. 187, 105 N.Y.S. 856

DecidedApril 15, 1907

StatusPublished

This text of 6 Mills Surr. 133 (In re the Estate of Hawk) 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 Estate of Hawk, 6 Mills Surr. 133, 54 Misc. 187, 105 N.Y.S. 856 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1907).

Pincite

Opinion

Thomas, S.

It is evident from the provisions of the will that the testator intended to give his executors and trustees the broadest discretion in making investments, and the purchase and retention of such securities as are disclosed by the account were made within the scope of their authority. Duncklee v. Butler, 30 Misc. Rep. 58; Lawton v. Lawton, 35 App. Div. 389; Matter of Hall, 164 N. Y. 196. They will not be charged with any loss incurred by reason of shrinkage in value of any of the securities. The will does not impose upon them the duty of providing a sinking fund to reimburse principal for premiums paid in the purchase of other securities, and it is fairly to be inferred from the provisions for the benefit of the life beneficiaries that it was the testator’s intention that they should [134]*134receive the income subject to the deduction of only the ordinary expenses of administration and of the trust. ¡Notice costs for taxation and settle decision and decree on notice.

Decreed accordingly.

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

Thomas, S.

It is evident from the provisions of the will that the testator intended to give his executors and trustees the broadest discretion in making investments, and the purchase and retention of such securities as are disclosed by the account were made within the scope of their authority. Duncklee v. Butler, 30 Misc. Rep. 58; Lawton v. Lawton, 35 App. Div. 389; Matter of Hall, 164 N. Y. 196. They will not be charged with any loss incurred by reason of shrinkage in value of any of the securities. The will does not impose upon them the duty of providing a sinking fund to reimburse principal for premiums paid in the purchase of other securities, and it is fairly to be inferred from the provisions for the benefit of the life beneficiaries that it was the testator’s intention that they should [134]*134receive the income subject to the deduction of only the ordinary expenses of administration and of the trust. ¡Notice costs for taxation and settle decision and decree on notice.

Decreed accordingly.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

6 Mills Surr. 133, 54 Misc. 187, 105 N.Y.S. 856, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-the-estate-of-hawk-nysurct-1907.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack