Legal Opinion

Stanfield v. Thorne

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

Decided June 15, 1926PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Judgment unanimously affirmed, with costs. The will indicates that the testator had the situation of all Ms property very carefully in mind, and when he wished an after-acquired interest to pass he provided for it. He, however, made no such provision as to the property involved in this action. The testator devised all Ms right, title and interest in and to the parcel in question, but he particularly stated what that right, title and interest then was. “ Whenever a testator refers to an actually existing state of tMngs, his language should be held as referring to the date of the will, and not…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Wetmore v. . ParkerNew York Court of Appeals · 1873
  2. Gold v. JudsonSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1852
  3. Lynes v. . TownsendNew York Court of Appeals · 1865

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. In re the Estate of OnodyNew York Surrogate's Court · 1962
  2. In re the Construction of the Will of OssontNew York Surrogate's Court · 1955

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API