Legal Opinion

In re the Estate of Birdsall

New York Surrogate's Court

Decided June 4, 1941PublishedCited by 9 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Taylor, S.

The executors appeal from the pro forma tax order and allege error in that no exemption was allowed the remainder-man. The exemption was disallowed upon the theory that there is no known data by which the amount of the remainder can now be determined, while the position of the executors is that this amount may now be reasonably determined by means of proof of the present trust income and the life beneficiary's manner and cost of living.

This problem presents first for discussion the meaning of paragraph “ two ” of the will which sets up a trust of the residue of the estate “ to take,…

2Cases cited12 opinions

  1. Ithaca Trust Co. v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1929
  2. In Re the Accounting of the Manufacturers National Bank of TroyNew York Court of Appeals · 1936
  3. Holden v. . StrongNew York Court of Appeals · 1889
  4. In Re the Estate of CreganNew York Court of Appeals · 1937
  5. In re the Estate of GatehouseNew York Surrogate's Court · 1933

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

3Cited by9 opinions

  1. In re the Estate of DowlingNew York Surrogate's Court · 1948
  2. George Bowie McCeney Robert S. McCeney Catherine M. Kotrla v. District of ColumbiaCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1956
  3. In re the Estate of MeyerNew York Surrogate's Court · 1966
  4. In re the Estate of StubblefieldNew York Surrogate's Court · 1948
  5. In re the Estate of CaroNew York Surrogate's Court · 1965

4 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