In re Richardson
New York Surrogate's Court
The testator died in 1865, and his will was proved in this county the same year, disposing of a large estate. By the will he provided that the executors or administrators of the survivor of two executors and trustees appointed by him should have the power to appoint an executor and trustee in their place.
Read the full summary
The testator died in 1865, and his will was proved in this county the same year, disposing of a large estate. By the will he provided that the executors or administrators of the survivor of two executors and trustees appointed by him should have the power to appoint an executor and trustee in their place. His wife, the survivor of the two named in his will, died- in January, 1890, leaving a will, by which she nominated her son, T. Chesley Richardson, and John Mulligan executors thereof, and they appointed said T. Chesley Richardson executor and trustee of Thomas Richardson’s will. Thereupon,…
1Opinion of the Court
Confín, S.
It is a curious fact and a matter of considerable moment in this case that T. Chesley Richardson never became a legally constituted executor of the will of Thomas Richardson, *59deceased, but has been regarded and treated as such. An order •was made sanctioning his appointment by the executors of his mother’s will, but he never qualified or received letters as such. He could not legally act as executor any more than if he had been named executor in his father’s will and failed to qualify. He was simply executor de son tort, and subject to all the consequences flowing from that relation.
2Cited by2 opinions
- In re Fox's EstateMichigan Supreme Court · 1908
- In re Estate of TreadwellNew York Surrogate's Court · 1902