In re the Estate of Moritz
New York Surrogate's Court
1Opinion of the Court
John D. Bennett, S.
In this accounting proceeding the executors take the position that the decedent’s will contains a clear direction against apportionment of taxes and requires that all taxes must be paid out of the general estate. The Attorney-General, representing indefinite charities, which are to be *324selected by the executors and which are to share in 30% of the decedent’s residuary estate, contends that the estate taxes should be apportioned in accordance with section 124 of the Decedent Estate Law.
In paragraph Second of the decedent’s will he provides: “ I direct my Executors hereinafter…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Farmers' Loan & Trust Co. v. WinthropNew York Court of Appeals · 1924
- In re the Estate of JamesNew York Surrogate's Court · 1943
- In re the Accounting of DullesNew York Court of Appeals · 1951
- In re the Accounting of DullesNew York Surrogate's Court · 1950
- In re the Construction of the Will of FairchildNew York Surrogate's Court · 1958
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by11 opinions
- Johnson v. HallCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1978
- In re the Estate of HammerNew York Surrogate's Court · 1974
- University of Louisville v. Liberty National Bank & Trust Co.Court of Appeals of Kentucky (pre-1976) · 1973
- In re the Estate of BauerNew York Surrogate's Court · 1967
- Matter of Estate of KingSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1979
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.