In re the Estate of Lesser
New York Surrogate's Court
1Opinion of the Court
Wingate, S.
It may well be doubted that the testamentary draftsman who prepared the present will, and whose act must be imputed to the testator, had any clear perception at the time he fabricated the document of the variety of problems of interpretation which were being generated.
The first and second items directed the payment of debts and provided for the disposal of testator’s remains in a specified manner. The fourth bequeathed $1,000 to a daughter, the fifth attempted to cut off the wife with a $500 gift, the sixth disinherited three sons by reason of their alleged disloyalty and…
2Cases cited23 opinions
- Oliver v. WellsNew York Court of Appeals · 1930
- In Re the Accounting of SilsbyNew York Court of Appeals · 1920
- Riker v. . CornwellNew York Court of Appeals · 1889
- In re Brooklyn Trust Co.New York Surrogate's Court · 1929
- In Re the Accounting of Brooklyn Trust Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1930
18 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- US Bank of Portland v. SnodgrassOregon Supreme Court · 1954
- In re the Estate of FerraraNew York Surrogate's Court · 1938
- In re the Estate of DettmerNew York Surrogate's Court · 1941
- In Re Estate of LaningSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1975
- In Re Estate of LaningSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1975