TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

Bodine v. Brown

Clothilde Bodine Et Al., Respondents, v. Ronald K. Brown Et Al., as Trustees of George Chesterman, Deceased, Et Al., Appellants; Louis A. S. Bodine Et Al., Respondents

Bodine v. Brown, 49 N.E. 1096 (N.Y. 1898)
Download
Format
Include

Star paging (*137) is kept for pin cites.

Court
New York Court of Appeals · State Highest Courts
Decided
January 11, 1898
Citations
49 N.E. 1096154 N.Y. 7781898 N.Y. LEXIS 1089
Summary
Appeal, by certification, from a judgment of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the first judicial department, entered December 30, 1896, which affirmed an interlocutory judgment entered upon a decision of the court at Special Term, confirming the report of a referee upon the trial of issues in an action for partition. The questions certified were as follows: First. Whether under the will and codicils of George Chesterman appearing in the record, the words “ heirs of such child,” in the 8th clause of said will, mean the heirs of the body or issue of such child, or whether they mean the persons who would inherit the real estate of which such child might die seized under the law of New York, in case such child died intestate. Second. Whether in case of the death of either of the children of George Chesterman, the testator, without leaving-issue, the fourth part of the real estate of said testator set. apart for the use of such child so dying, is to be distributed among the surviving brothers and sisters of such child so. dying without issue, and the issue of any deceased brother or sister, per stirpes ox per capita. Third. Whether in case of the death of either of the children of said testator without issue, the said testator, George Chesterman, died intestate in respect to the remainder in the share of the real estate of said testator set apart for the benefit of such child during his or her life.

Syllabus and headnotes are prepared by the reporter or publisher, not the court, and are not part of the opinion.

Opinion of the Court

Judgment affirmed on opinion below, with costs, and the-questions certified to this court answered as follows:

First.

The words “ heirs of such child,” in the 8th clause of the testator’s will, mean the person or persons who, in case-such child should die intestate, would, under the laws of New York, inherit the real estate of which he or she might die seized.

Second.

If any of the children of the testator die without leaving issue, the one-fourth of the real estate set apart for the use of that child is to be distributed among his or her surviving brothers and sisters and the issue of any deceased brother or sister per capita and not per stirpes.

Third.

In case of the death of any of his children without issue, the testator did not die intestate in respect to the remainder in the share set apart for the benefit of éacli child during life, but it goes to his or her heirs at law to be equally divided between them.

All concur.

How later courts describe this case

No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.

1922: 119222026peak 1922 · 1

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. In re Flint118 Misc. 134 (N.Y. Sur. Ct. 1922)

Most recent

  1. In re Flint118 Misc. 134 (N.Y. Sur. Ct. 1922)

Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.

Authorities cited 0

No citations to other opinions in this database were found.

Keyboard shortcuts

/Focus the search box
j kNext / previous result
EnterOpen the selected result
xAdd / remove the selected result from the download list
n pNext / previous search term in a case
cCopy the citation of the current case
+ −Larger / smaller reading text
?Show this list