Legal Opinion
Adams v. Williamson
Supreme Court of Connecticut
Decided November 7, 1962PublishedCited by 4 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtKing, J.
Doris V. Adams, hereinafter called the plaintiff, qualified, and is now acting, as executrix of the will and codicil of her husband, Emmett C. Adams. The codicil is without significance in this appeal and will not hereinafter be mentioned. The testator provided for certain nonresiduary legacies, including one of which the plaintiff was beneficiary, and established a trust of the residue. The plaintiff and Rodney D. Adams were named, and are now acting, as cotrustees.
The plaintiff’s legacy was established by a rather elaborate provision forming article second of the will. In their stipulation,…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- Meinhard v. SalmonNew York Court of Appeals · 1928
- Wendt v. FischerNew York Court of Appeals · 1926
- Dickinson v. HayesSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1863
- Haverin v. WelchSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1942
- Greene v. KingSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1926
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- Pacelli Bros. Transportation, Inc. v. PacelliSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1983
- Owens v. DoyleSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1964
- Sarner v. Fox Hill, Inc.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1964
- DiMauro v. PaviaDistrict Court, D. Connecticut · 1979