Whitson v. . Whitson
New York Court of Appeals
Appeal from an order of the General Term of the Supreme Court in the second judicial department, affirming a decree of the surrogate of Queens county made on the final settlement of the accounts of plaintiffs, as executors of the estate of Charles J. Whitson, deceased.
Read the full summary
Appeal from an order of the General Term of the Supreme Court in the second judicial department, affirming a decree of the surrogate of Queens county made on the final settlement of the accounts of plaintiffs, as executors of the estate of Charles J. Whitson, deceased. Said Whitson died in the year 1868, leaving a last will and testament, which contained the following bequest: “I give and bequeath to my beloved wife, Eliza C. Whit-son, the life use of the sum of ten thousand dollars ($10,000), directing my executors to semi-annually pay to her the lawful interest of the said sum of $10,000…
1Opinion of the CourtGrover, J.
The question in this case is whether the bequest to the respondent was the use and income of $10,000 during her life, or an annuity of $700 payable semi-annually for the same period. If the former, the taxes upon the fund and expenses of the trust must be paid out of the income. (Lansing v. Lansing, 1 Abbott [N. S.], 280; Pinckney v. Pinckney, 1 Bradf., 269; Lawrence v. Holden, 3 id., 142; Williams on Exrs., 1398; Dayton on Surrogate, 419, 466.) If the latter, it is equally clear that that sum must be paid to her from the estate without any deduction on account of taxes imposed upon the fund…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Pinckney v. PinckneyNew York Surrogate's Court · 1850
3Cited by24 opinions
- Dougherty v. . ThompsonNew York Court of Appeals · 1901
- Matter of DeweyNew York Court of Appeals · 1897
- Hoyt v. BlissSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1919
- Routt v. NewmanIllinois Supreme Court · 1911
- Peck v. KinneyCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1905
19 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.