Legal Opinion
Maul v. Maul
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
Decided July 2, 1941PublishedCited by 2 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Decree affirmed, without costs. Memorandum: The execution by Lynda M. Maul during the lifetime of her husband, Peter Maul, now deceased, of an instrument waiving her right of election to take against the last will and testament of her said husband, was proved by a subscribing witness. This was a compliance with the requirement of subdivision 9 of section 18 of the Decedent Estate Law, that such instrument should be “ duly acknowledged.” (Gen. Constr. Law, §§ 10, 11; Pers. Prop. Law, § 32; Real Prop. Law, § 274; O’Keeffe v. Dugan, 225 N. Y. 667, 668.) In O’Keeffe v. Dugan (supra), an action to…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- In Re the Estate of McGloneNew York Court of Appeals · 1940
- Rogers v. . PellNew York Court of Appeals · 1898
- In re the Estate of MaulNew York Surrogate's Court · 1941
- O'Keeffe v. . DuganNew York Court of Appeals · 1919
- In re EriksonAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1934
3Cited by2 opinions
- Federal Deposit Insurance Co., Cross-Appellant v. Leonard Malin, and Phyllis Malin, Cross-AppelleesCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1986
- Musico v. MusicoDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1982