White v. Hicks
New York Supreme Court
LIZA H. HICKS RIELEN, who was the daughter of Samuel Hicks, deceased, died in the year 1855, leaving her husband surviving, but no descendants. During her last illness, and shortly before her death, she made a will, which was duly admitted to probate in 1857. This instrument was drawn by the attending physician, Dr. Cheeseman.
Read the full summary
LIZA H. HICKS RIELEN, who was the daughter of Samuel Hicks, deceased, died in the year 1855, leaving her husband surviving, but no descendants. During her last illness, and shortly before her death, she made a will, which was duly admitted to probate in 1857. This instrument was drawn by the attending physician, Dr. Cheeseman. By its provisions she gave to her husband, Pierre Rieben, §50,000; to Hannah T. White, §20,000; to Samuel Hicks Seaman, §5000; to Maria W. Corlies, §1000; to Fanny Haff, §1000; to Luther Terry, §1000. The residuary clause was in the following terms: “The remainder to be…
1Opinion of the CourtSutherland, J.
The question in this case is: Did Mrs. Bieben, by her will, exercise, or execute, the general power of appointment, given to her by the will of her father, over $50,000 of the $100,000 which he directed to be kept invested for her use, during her life ?
If the question were a question of intention, on the will of Mrs. Bieben, and the evidence in the case, there could not be a doubt that her will should be deemed a due execution, of the power, and that the judgment of the special term should be affirmed. But the question in the case really is, as to the admissibility of certain evidence, to…
2Cited by5 opinions
- Hutton v. . BenkardNew York Court of Appeals · 1883
- Terry v. RodahanSupreme Court of Georgia · 1888
- Bingham's AppealSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1870
- Kibler v. HuverNew York Supreme Court · 1890
- In re the Judicial Settlement of the Accounts of PiffardNew York Supreme Court · 1886