Legal Opinion
In re the Estate of Hopner
New York Surrogate's Court
Decided August 30, 1933PublishedCited by 16 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Wingate, S.
The will which is the subject-matter of this construction proceeding, after specific bequests of certain articles of household furniture, gave the entire remainder of testator’s propperty to his two daughters, Eleanor and Daisy, in trust to invest, and after deduction from the income of all necessary expenses, to divide such income into seven equal parts. The item in question then proceeded: “ and that they pay two of said parts or shares to each of my two daughters, Eleanor E. Hopner and Daisy Hopner, one of said parts or shares to my daughter Caroline E. Helme, and one of said…
2Cases cited25 opinions
- Manice v. . ManiceNew York Court of Appeals · 1871
- Rudd v. . CornellNew York Court of Appeals · 1902
- Smith v. . EdwardsNew York Court of Appeals · 1882
- Wright v. . WrightNew York Court of Appeals · 1919
- Warner v. . DurantNew York Court of Appeals · 1879
20 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by16 opinions
- In re the Estate of WeilNew York Surrogate's Court · 1934
- In re the Estate of GatehouseNew York Surrogate's Court · 1933
- In re the Estate of HilliardNew York Surrogate's Court · 1937
- In re the Estate of SalomonNew York Surrogate's Court · 1936
- In re the Estate of CrespiNew York Surrogate's Court · 1936
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.