In re the Estate of Kennedy

151 Misc. 193, 271 N.Y.S. 126, 1934 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 1245
CourtNew York Surrogate's Court
DecidedApril 6, 1934
StatusPublished
Cited by2 cases

This text of 151 Misc. 193 (In re the Estate of Kennedy) 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 Kennedy, 151 Misc. 193, 271 N.Y.S. 126, 1934 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 1245 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1934).

Opinion

Henderson, S.

The questions of construction arising in this proceeding to settle the executor’s account are determined as follows:

Paragraph eighth ” of the will reads as follows: I give and bequeath to my son, Rev. Charles E. Kennedy, the sum of One thousand ($1,000.00) Dollars, with the direction that he use the same for the education of his four (4) children, Elsie Ann, Catherine, Charles E., and John P.”

No trust is created and there is an express direction that this legacy is for the benefit of the four children. I find that each of them has a vested right to $250. (Matter of DeRycke, 99 App. Div. 596; Steinert v. Steinert, 161 id. 841; Real Prop. Law, § 93; Pers. Prop. Law, § 11; Matter of Leahy, 119 Misc. 556.)

Paragraph “ tenth ” reads as follows: I give and bequeath the sum of Five hundred ($500.00) Dollars to the Orange Hall Building Association of New York and direct that the said Five hundred ($500.00) Dollars be paid by my executor when the corner stone of the new hall is laid, and not before that time.”

The Orange Hall Building Association has not begun the erection of a hall, and it is not within its present plan to erect any building. This legacy is not for any charitable use. The language used by the testator clearly discloses his intention to limit the bequest upon a condition precedent, the performance of which is unrestricted as to time. The testamentary direction obviously permits the suspension of the power of alienation and of absolute ownership beyond the statutory period. (Real Prop. Law, § 42; Pers. Prop. Law, § 11.) The attempted gift is invalid (Booth v. Baptist Church, 126 N. Y. 215, 243), and passes under the residuary clause.

Settle decree.

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

Related

In re the Construction of the Will of Lawless
194 Misc. 844 (New York Surrogate's Court, 1949)
In re the Estate of Mills
156 Misc. 473 (New York Surrogate's Court, 1935)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
151 Misc. 193, 271 N.Y.S. 126, 1934 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 1245, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-the-estate-of-kennedy-nysurct-1934.