Wood v. Mitchell

61 How. Pr. 48
CourtNew York Supreme Court
DecidedApril 15, 1881
StatusPublished

This text of 61 How. Pr. 48 (Wood v. Mitchell) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New York Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Wood v. Mitchell, 61 How. Pr. 48 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1881).

Opinion

Larremore, J.

James Eowe, by his will, dated February 19, 1868, after making provision for the payment of his debts, directs a sale of all his residuary estate by his executors and an investment by them of a certain portion thereof for the benefit of his wife and son, Henry O. Eowe. He further directs that the balance be divided into seven equal parts and invested, and that the income thereof be applied to the use of his six daughters therein named, and upon their respective deaths, that the principal and unappropriated income thereof be distributed among their living lawful issue per stirpes. Said will further provided that in case either of said daughters should die, leaving no lawful issue her surviving, that such principal and unappropriated income shall be paid over to such persons (and in such shares and proportions) as by the present laws of the state of Hew York would take personal property of which the testator died possessed had he died intestate. The remaining one-seventh of the estate the testator disposed of as follows :

Seventh. I order and direct my said executors, the survivors and survivor of them, and such of them as shall act, to subdivide the remaining seventh, part of the proceeds of may said real and personal estate into four equal parts, and to invest and accumulate one of said equal fourth parts until the arrival at full age or the death of my granddaughter Viola Yates, child of my deceased daughter Cordelia Yates, whichever shall first happen, and upon her arrival at the age of twenty-one years to pay over the same, with its accumulations, to my said granddaughter; and in case- of her death prior to attaining that age, to pay over the said fourth part, with its accumulations, to her lawful issue; and in default of issue of my said granddaughter living at her- death, then to pay over the same, with its accumulations, to- her then living brothers and sisters and the issue of any deceased brother or sister who shall have died leaving lawful issue then living, each then living brother and sister of hers taking one equal share thereof, and the issue of any deceased brother or sister of hers [50]*50taking, by representation, the share the parent of such issue would have taken if living. And to invest and accumulate one other of said equal fourth parts until the death or arrival at full age, whichever shall first happen, of my granddaughter Adelaide Yates, child of my deceased daughter Cordelia Yates, and upon her arrival at the age of twenty-one years, to pay over the same, with its accumulations, to her; and in casé of her death prior to her attaining the said age, to pay over the said fourth part, with its accumulations, to her lawful issue ; and •in default of issue of my said granddaughter Adelaide living at her death, then to pay over the same, with its accumulations, to her then living brothers and sisters and the issue of any deceased brother or sister who shall have died leaving lawful issue then living, each then living brother and sister of hers taking one equal share thereof, and the issue of any deceased brother or sister of hers taking, by representation, the share the parent of such issue would have taken if then living. And to invest and accumulate one other of said equal fourth parts until the arrival at full age or death, whichever shall first happen, of my grandson Henry Yates, child of my deceased daughter Cordelia Yates; and upon this, at the age of twenty-, one years, to pay over the same to him, with its accumulations, and in case of his death prior to attaining said age, to pay over the said fourth part, with its accumulations, to his lawful issue; and in default of issue of my said grandson Henry living at his death, then to pay over the same, with its accumulations, to his then living sisters and the issue of any deceased sister who shall have died leaving lawful issue then living, each then living sister of his taking one equal share thereof, and the issue of any deceased sister of his taking, by representation, the share the parents of such issue would have taken if living. And to invest and accumulate the remaining one equal fourth part until the arrival at full age or death, whichever shall first happen, of my granddaughter Catherine Yates, child of my deceased daughter Cordelia Yates, and .upon her arrival at the age of twenty-one years, to pay over [51]*51the same, with its accumulations, to her; and in case of her death prior to attaining said age, to pay over the said fourth part,' with its accumulations, to her lawful issue; and in default of issue of my said granddaughter Catherine living at her death, then to pay over the same, with its accumulations, to her then living brother and sisters and the issue of any deceased brother or sister who shall have died leaving lawful issue then living, each then living brother and sister taking one equal share thereof, and the issue of any deceased brother or sister of hers taking, by representation, the share the parent of such issue would have taken if then living.”

By a codicil to the will, dated April 8th, 1871, the testator revoked the provisions therein as to his daughters Maria C. Shepard and Louisa Cornell, giving other and further directions as the disposition of their respective shares, but in other respects ratifying and confirming his foregoing will.

The testator died October 18, 1871, and his will and codicil were admitted to probate December 11, 1871. His daughter Cordelia Tates died prior to 1860, leaving her surviving, her husband Charles Tates and four children, being the grandchildren named in the seventh subdivision of the will. They were as follows: Viola Tates, now the wife of Ovine P, Mitchell; Adelaide Tates, now the wife of George C. Free-’ born; Henry Tates; Catharine Tates, who died November 30, 1874, unmarried and before having attained her majority. Said Charles Tates, the father of said Catherine, as aforesaid, in October, 1860, married Josephine fí. Bosworth, by whom he had issue Frances Tates and Stella Tates. Catherine Tates, therefore, left her surviving Viola Tates, Adelaide Tates and Henry Tates, sisters and brother of the whole blood; Frances Tates and Stella Tates, sisters of the half blood.

The question presented for adjudication is whether, under the testator’s will, as republished and reaffirmed by its codicil, Frances and Stella Tates are entitled to a distributive share of the estate of their deceased half-sister.

It was urged on the argument that no such estate vested in [52]*52Catherine as upon her death would become the subject of inheritance from her by her next of kin; that as she had but one brother and two sisters of the whole blood, the limitation to “her then living brother and sisters” must be understood in the natural and ordinary sense of children of the same parents.

It will be conceded that the legal and common presumption is in favor of the usual line of descent, unless a contrary intention is manifested by the testator (Barnes agt. Greenbach, 1 Edw. Ch., 41; Hussey agt. Burkley, 3 Edw. Ch., 194; Cutter agt. Doughty, 23 Wend., 513 ; 7 Hill, 305; Jarman on Wills, [2d vol.], 665 ; Grieves agt. Rawley, 10 Hun, 63; Quinn agt. Hardenbrook, 54 N. Y., 86; Scott agt. Guernsey, 48 N. Y., 106).

A sister is defined to be .a “ woman who has the same father and mother with another, or has one of them only; in the first case she is called sister, simply; in the second, half sister ” (Bouvier's Lam Dictionary).

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

Related

Van Alstyne v. . Van Alstyne
28 N.Y. 375 (New York Court of Appeals, 1863)
Hone v. . Van Schaick
3 N.Y. 538 (New York Court of Appeals, 1850)
The People v. . Gonzalez
35 N.Y. 49 (New York Court of Appeals, 1866)
Scott v. . Guernsey
48 N.Y. 106 (New York Court of Appeals, 1871)
Cutter v. Doughty
23 Wend. 513 (New York Supreme Court, 1840)
Purcell v. Purcell
3 Edw. Ch. 194 (New York Court of Chancery, 1838)
Cromer v. Pinckney
3 Barb. Ch. 466 (New York Court of Chancery, 1848)
Westcott v. Cady
5 Johns. Ch. 334 (New York Court of Chancery, 1821)
Mann v. Mann
14 Johns. 1 (Court for the Trial of Impeachments and Correction of Errors, 1816)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
61 How. Pr. 48, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/wood-v-mitchell-nysupct-1881.