Crouse v. Wilson
New York Supreme Court
Appeal from special term, Onondaga county. Action by Jacob Crouse and others against Eiila Henrietta Kosterlitz and others to construe the will of Daniel E. Crouse, deceased. From an interlocutory judgment sustaining demurrers of defendants Kosteiiitz and Wilson to the complaint, plaintiffs appeal.
Read the full summary
Appeal from special term, Onondaga county. Action by Jacob Crouse and others against Eiila Henrietta Kosterlitz and others to construe the will of Daniel E. Crouse, deceased. From an interlocutory judgment sustaining demurrers of defendants Kosteiiitz and Wilson to the complaint, plaintiffs appeal. In the complaint it is alleged that on the 21st November, 1892, Daniel E. Crouse of Syracuse, N. Y., died, leaving a last will and testament of both real and personal property; that he left, him surviving, no wife or child, and that the plaintiffs are heirs at law and next of kin of the testator;…
1Opinion of the CourtMerwin, J.
The main argument of the learned counsel for the plaintiffs seems to be based on the theory that the action is for the construction of a will. The character of the will does not sustain this theory. There is no doubt about the intention of the testator. The residue is given to his “heirs and next of kin, in the same proportion that is provided by the laws of the state of New York in cases of intestates.” No construction is needed to carry out this provision. The statute regulates the subject. It is not claimed that the action is for an accounting. The complaint is not on that basis. From the…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Riggs v. . CraggNew York Court of Appeals · 1882
- In Re the Judicial Settlement of the Accounts of the ExecutorsNew York Court of Appeals · 1883
- Garlock v. . VandevortNew York Court of Appeals · 1891
- Trustees of Hobart College v. FitzhughNew York Court of Appeals · 1863