Tuttle v. Heidermann
New York Surrogate's Court
This was an npplication to compel the executors, etc., of decedent to pay to Louisa Y. Tattle, a daughter, a legacy of $6,000. The petition of Mrs. Tuttle stated that, by the will of decedent, admitted to probate December 9,1880, she was entitled to a legacy of $6,000, and, on information and belief, that Julius Heidertnann, and others, the executors, had in their hands property exceeding, by at least oneiliird, the amount of all,claims against the estate, including…
Read the full summary
This was an npplication to compel the executors, etc., of decedent to pay to Louisa Y. Tattle, a daughter, a legacy of $6,000. The petition of Mrs. Tuttle stated that, by the will of decedent, admitted to probate December 9,1880, she was entitled to a legacy of $6,000, and, on information and belief, that Julius Heidertnann, and others, the executors, had in their hands property exceeding, by at least oneiliird, the amount of all,claims against the estate, including legacies, applicable to tlieir payment; that, for about six years, decedent was not engaged in business, and lived upon the…
1Opinion of the Court
The Surrogate.
The leading principle, in the construction of wills, is that the intention of the testator, if not inconsistent with the rules of law, must govern, and this intention is to be ascertained from the whole will taken together (Covenhoven v. Shuler, 2 Paige, 122; Crosby v. Wendell, 6 Id., 548; Pond v. Bergh, 10 Id., 140; Parks v. Parks, 9 Id., 107; Van Nostrand v. Moore, 52 N. Y., 12 ; 1 Redf., on Wills, 433, and cases cited; Betts v. Betts, 4 Abb. N. C., 317). Another rule is that, where there is a subsequent provision inconsistent and irreconcilable with a former provision, the…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Covenhoven v. ShulerNew York Court of Chancery · 1830
- Van Nostrand v. . MooreNew York Court of Appeals · 1873
- Van Kleeck v. Dutch ChurchNew York Supreme Court · 1838
- Betts v. BettsNew York Supreme Court · 1878
- Heard v. CaseNew York Supreme Court · 1861