Legal Opinion
In re the Revocation of a Trust between Schlussel
New York Supreme Court
Decided May 9, 1949PublishedCited by 5 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtHofstadter, J.
This proceeding under article 79 of the Civil Practice Act presents a somewhat unusual aspect of the problem of the revocation of an inter vivas trust, because of the possible interest in the trust of an unnamed charitable institution.
The trust indenture dated March 28, 1921, was entered into between the petitioner as settlor and Central Union Trust Company (now Central Hanover Bank and Trust Company) as trustee. Though the petitioner was then a resident of Chicago, Illinois, and executed the indenture in that city, the agreement directs that it ‘‘ shall in any and all respects and events be…
2Cases cited19 opinions
- Allen v. . StevensNew York Court of Appeals · 1899
- Cutting v. . CuttingNew York Court of Appeals · 1881
- St. Joseph's Hospital v. BennettNew York Court of Appeals · 1939
- Burbank v. BurbankMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1890
- Trustees of the Sailors' Snug Harbor v. CarmodyNew York Court of Appeals · 1914
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- In re the Estate of SmithNew York Surrogate's Court · 1973
- In re the Estate of StanleyNew York Surrogate's Court · 1969
- In re the Accounting of Central Hanover Bank & Trust Co.New York Supreme Court · 1952
- Martin v. LefkowitzNew York Supreme Court · 1963
- Estate of Halpern v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1995