Schwartz v. BayBank Merrimack Valley, N.A.
Massachusetts Appeals Court
1Opinion of the CourtGreaney, J.
This case involves a testamentary power of appointment, the terms of which called for its exercise by specific reference to the power in the donee’s will. A judge of a Probate Court concluded, after trial, that the power had not been exercised by the residuary clause of the donee’s will which neither referred to the power nor purported to exercise any power of appointment. We conclude that the judge’s decision was correct and affirm his judgment.
The facts are drawn from the judge’s findings. On April 1, 1957, Mary F. Cox executed a will which provided that the residue of her estate be held in…
2Cases cited18 opinions
- National Shawmut Bank v. JoyMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1944
- State Street Bank & Trust Co. v. ReiserMassachusetts Appeals Court · 1979
- Holzbach v. United Virginia BankSupreme Court of Virginia · 1975
- Boston Safe Deposit & Trust Co. v. PrindleMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1935
- Schede EstateSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1967
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by7 opinions
- Matter of StrobelArizona Supreme Court · 1986
- Estate of O'Connor v. O'Connor, California Court of Appeal, 5th District2018
- Museum of Fine Arts v. BelandMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 2000
- Greenwood v. PetersonArizona Supreme Court · 1986
- Bank of Oklahoma, N.A. v. AtwoodCourt of Civil Appeals of Oklahoma · 2001
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.