In re the Estate of Smith

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re the Estate of Smith

253 A.D. 731, 300 N.Y.S. 919, 1937 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5363

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

DecidedDecember 10, 1937

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 253 A.D. 731 (In re the Estate of Smith) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York 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 Smith, 253 A.D. 731, 300 N.Y.S. 919, 1937 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5363 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1937).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal by executors from an order of the Surrogate’s Court of Westchester county requiring them in their account to include petitioner as legatee because of a money legacy bequeathed to her in a codicil to the testator’s will, which bequest was the sole testamentary provision in the codicil. Order affirmed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements to respondent, payable out of the estate. Petitioner, respondent, was an attesting witness to the will, which could not be proved without her testimony, but she was not a beneficiary thereunder. By the codicil she received a specific bequest; but she was not an attesting witness to that instrument. The codicil was complete in itself. It was independent of the provisions in the will. It was, therefore, a separate testamentary instrument entitled to separate probate; and the bequest to petitioner was not void under section 27 of the Decedent Estate Law. (Matter of Emmons, 110 App. Div. 701, 704, 705; Matter of Pardy, 161 Misc. 77, 83, 84.) Hagarty, Davis, Adel, Taylor and Close, JJ., concur. [165 Misc. 36.]

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

Appeal by executors from an order of the Surrogate’s Court of Westchester county requiring them in their account to include petitioner as legatee because of a money legacy bequeathed to her in a codicil to the testator’s will, which bequest was the sole testamentary provision in the codicil. Order affirmed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements to respondent, payable out of the estate. Petitioner, respondent, was an attesting witness to the will, which could not be proved without her testimony, but she was not a beneficiary thereunder. By the codicil she received a specific bequest; but she was not an attesting witness to that instrument. The codicil was complete in itself. It was independent of the provisions in the will. It was, therefore, a separate testamentary instrument entitled to separate probate; and the bequest to petitioner was not void under section 27 of the Decedent Estate Law. (Matter of Emmons, 110 App. Div. 701, 704, 705; Matter of Pardy, 161 Misc. 77, 83, 84.) Hagarty, Davis, Adel, Taylor and Close, JJ., concur. [165 Misc. 36.]

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

253 A.D. 731, 300 N.Y.S. 919, 1937 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5363, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-the-estate-of-smith-nyappdiv-1937.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack