Legal Opinion
In re Proving the Last Will & Testament of Peraza
New York Surrogate's Court
Decided June 15, 1911PublishedCited by 3 opinions
Proceeding upon the. probate of a will.
1Opinion of the Court
Fowler, S.
The factum of this will was sufficiently proved upon the trial and is established. It remains now to determine the issues raised by the answers as to the validity, construction and effect of clause second, which relates wholly to personal property. Such clause reads as follows:
“ Second. I give and bequeath to my son, Nicanor Bolet, all my right, title and interest, whatsoever, in and to the business now conducted by him for me, and known variously as ‘ Pildoras Tocologicas Del" Doctor N. Bolet ’ and as 1 Doctor N. Bolet,’ and as ‘ Doctor Nicanor Bolet’s Tocological Pills,’ &c.,…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Phelps' v. . PondNew York Court of Appeals · 1861
- Locke v. Farmers' Loan & Trust Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1893
- Cunningham v. . ParkerNew York Court of Appeals · 1895
- In re the Judicial Settlement of the Account of Proceedings of HartAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1901
- In re Proving the Last Will & Testament of RaabAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1899
3Cited by3 opinions
- In re Construe the Last Will & Testament of FowlesNew York Surrogate's Court · 1916
- In re the Accounting of BorstelmannNew York Surrogate's Court · 1955
- United States v. Olga AlmonteCourt of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 2020