Legal Opinion

Arthur v. Nelson

New York Surrogate's Court

Decided December 15, 1882PublishedCited by 1 opinion

The testator died in 1869, leaving a last will and testament, in and by which he gave the residue of his estate, after the payment of his debts, some small legacies, etc., as follows: one equal eighth part thereof to his son Thomas; four equal eighth parts thereof to his executors, in trust, each one of the said eighths for the benefit, for life, of one of four daughters; the income, etc., to he received and applied by said executors, with power of appointment to each of…

Read the full summary

The testator died in 1869, leaving a last will and testament, in and by which he gave the residue of his estate, after the payment of his debts, some small legacies, etc., as follows: one equal eighth part thereof to his son Thomas; four equal eighth parts thereof to his executors, in trust, each one of the said eighths for the benefit, for life, of one of four daughters; the income, etc., to he received and applied by said executors, with power of appointment to each of said daughters, of her one eighth, and, in default thereof, then to their respective heirs and. next of kin. Another one…

1Opinion of the Court

The Surrogate.

The testator died, leaving a very large estate, real and personal; the latter amounting to upwards of $400,000, consisting mainly of stocks, bonds and mortgages, and debts due to him from his children. Of the real estate much has been sold,, and much remains unsold. In consequence of the great lapse of time since his death, during which no account has been rendered, the large amount of the estate, and the number of beneficiaries with whom accounts were kept, great difficulty has been experienced in reaching a satisfactory result.

In construing some of the provisions of the will,…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Holden v. . New York and Erie BankNew York Court of Appeals · 1878
  2. Bundy v. . BundyNew York Court of Appeals · 1868
  3. Storring v. BorrenNew York Supreme Court · 1864

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. In re ArkenburghAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1899

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

Powered by the Exa API