Legal Opinion
Neilson v. Bishop
New Jersey Court of Chancery
Decided May 15, 1889PublishedCited by 15 opinions
On final hearing on bill, answer and proofs taken in open court.
1Opinion of the Court
Van Fleet, V. C.
The complainants are the executors of the will of Mary A. McClelland, deceased. They ask direction as to what disposition they shall make of a part of the estate of their testatrix.
The testatrix, by her will, executed in March, 1864, gave two of her grandchildren, Howard W. Bishop and Alexander McC. Bishop, $3,000 each. Howard W., one ofthe two legatees, died in September, 1866, leaving an only child, named Howard Bishop. In December, 1868, the testatrix executed a codicil to her will, revoking the gift of $3,000 each to Howard W. and Alexander McC., and in lieu thereof gave…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Weyman's Executors v. RingoldNew York Surrogate's Court · 1849
3Cited by15 opinions
- Byrne v. ByrneNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1938
- Traverso v. TraversoNew Jersey Court of Chancery · 1926
- Fidelity Union Trust Co. v. RowlandNew Jersey Court of Chancery · 1926
- Potter v. WatkinsNew Jersey Court of Chancery · 1926
- Rusch v. MeloshNew Jersey Court of Chancery · 1943
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.