Wilson v. Wilson
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
■ Separate appeals by the defendants, Arthur H. Wilson and Mary F. Mott, individually and as executors, etc., from a'judgment of the Supreme Court in favor of the plaintiff, entered in the office of the clerk of the county of Kings on the 28th day of January, 1907, upon the decision of the court, rendered after a trial at the Kings County Special Term, construing a will.
Read the full summary
■ Separate appeals by the defendants, Arthur H. Wilson and Mary F. Mott, individually and as executors, etc., from a'judgment of the Supreme Court in favor of the plaintiff, entered in the office of the clerk of the county of Kings on the 28th day of January, 1907, upon the decision of the court, rendered after a trial at the Kings County Special Term, construing a will. By the third clause of his will the testator. gave, devised and bequeathed to his executors all of his estate (excepting' a previous bequest of some stocks), “ to divide the same into two equal parts, and to hold one part…
1Opinion of the Court
Gaynor, J.:
Where the provisions of a will for the widow are inconsistent with her taking dower, although it be not made in terms in lieu of dower, as is the case here, she is nevertheless put to her election whether she will take dower instead of such provision, for she cannot in such case have both, and cannot in any case be" deprived of her dower without her consent. The widow here claims that there is no inconsistency, and that she is therefore entitled to both.
The will- puts one half of the estate in trust with the executors . for the-.widow for life, remainder to the three children ; and…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Lewis v. . SmithNew York Court of Appeals · 1854
- Konvalinka v. . SchlegelNew York Court of Appeals · 1887
- In Re the Judicial Settlement of the Accounts of JamesNew York Court of Appeals · 1895
- In Re the Accounting of GordenNew York Court of Appeals · 1902
- Adsit v. AdsitNew York Court of Chancery · 1817
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by11 opinions
- Standard Sand & Gravel Co. v. City of New YorkAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1916
- In re the Transfer Tax Upon the Estate of StuyvesantNew York Surrogate's Court · 1911
- In re the Estate of HumeNew York Surrogate's Court · 1931
- In re the Judicial Settlement of the Account of WalshNew York Surrogate's Court · 1926
- In re the Transfer Tax Upon the Estate of GaleNew York Surrogate's Court · 1914
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.