Spatz v. Silverston

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Spatz v. Silverston

11 A.D.2d 744, 204 N.Y.S.2d 639, 1960 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9019

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

DecidedJune 27, 1960

StatusPublished

This text of 11 A.D.2d 744 (Spatz v. Silverston) 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

Spatz v. Silverston, 11 A.D.2d 744, 204 N.Y.S.2d 639, 1960 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9019 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1960).

Pincite

Opinion

— In an action for an accounting of rents and profits of a parcel of real property, defendants appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County, dated May 18,1959, which denied their motion for summary judgment. Order reversed, with $10 costs and disbursements, and motion granted. Despite the fact that better verbiage could have been employed for the purpose in the probated will in question, it is sufficiently clear that the testatrix by her will gave defendant Harry Silverston a life estate in the property, and gave the fee interest in the property to the plaintiff and to the defendant Nathan Silverston, subject to the said life estate. Under the circumstances, plaintiff has failed to show any right of action against defendants, and there is no triable issue of fact. Nolan, P. J., Beldóek, Ughetta, Kleinfeld and Christ, JJ., concur.

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

— In an action for an accounting of rents and profits of a parcel of real property, defendants appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County, dated May 18,1959, which denied their motion for summary judgment. Order reversed, with $10 costs and disbursements, and motion granted. Despite the fact that better verbiage could have been employed for the purpose in the probated will in question, it is sufficiently clear that the testatrix by her will gave defendant Harry Silverston a life estate in the property, and gave the fee interest in the property to the plaintiff and to the defendant Nathan Silverston, subject to the said life estate. Under the circumstances, plaintiff has failed to show any right of action against defendants, and there is no triable issue of fact. Nolan, P. J., Beldóek, Ughetta, Kleinfeld and Christ, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

11 A.D.2d 744, 204 N.Y.S.2d 639, 1960 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9019, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/spatz-v-silverston-nyappdiv-1960.