Legal Opinion

Ansonia National Bank v. Kunkel

Supreme Court of Connecticut

Decided March 5, 1927PublishedCited by 39 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtHaines, J.

The purpose of this action is to determine the proper interpretation of the fourteenth clause, subsection (b), of the will of John T. Kent, deceased, which reads as follows: “(b) To pay the net income of said trust quarterly in equal shares to my sisters, Annie Conklin and Nora Ford, and my niece, Catherine McCarthy, daughter of my deceased sister, Elizabeth Buckley, so long as my two sisters shall live. Upon the death of either of my said sisters or of said Catherine McCarthy, to pay the portion of the income of the one deceased to her issue, the children of any deceased issue to take per…

2Cases cited19 opinions

  1. Bartlett v. SearsSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1908
  2. Belfield v. BoothSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1893
  3. Lyon v. AckerSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1866
  4. State Bank & Trust Co. v. NolanSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1925
  5. Peckham v. LegoSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1889

14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by39 opinions

  1. United States v. Provident Trust Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1934
  2. In re the Construction of the Will of UpjohnNew York Court of Appeals · 1952
  3. Sontheimer v. PierceCalifornia Supreme Court · 1948
  4. Mooney v. TollesSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1930
  5. In Re the Estate of CoeSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1964

34 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API