Case ID: ny_227/html/0656-02.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Herman L. Edgar et al., Respondents, v. Rhinelander Waldo, Appellant, and Charles D. Newton, as Attorney-General, et al., Respondents.
    
      Edgar v. Waldo, 186 App. Div. 882, affirmed.
    (Argued December 4, 1919;
    decided January 6, 1920.)
    Appeal, by permission, from a judgment of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the first judicial department, entered December 18, 1918, affirming a judgment entered upon a decision of the court on trial at Special Term construing the seventh article of the will of Charles E. Rhinelander, deceased, which reads as follows: “ All the rest, residue, and remainder of my estate, both real, personal, and mixed, and wheresoever the same may be situated, including lapsed and void legacies and all my estate the disposition of which may for any reason fail, I give, devise, and bequeath to Benjamin Aymar Sands and Herman LeRoy Edgar, and to their survivor. I desire them to distribute my said residuary estate among such religious, charitable, and educational corporations as they may designate.” It was claimed by the defendant, appellant, Waldo that this clause attempted to create a trust of the residuary estate, which was void for indefiniteness, and that as the sole heir-at-law and next of kin of the testator he was entitled to the entire residuary estate as intestate property. The trial court decided that the seventh article of the will operated as a gift of the entire residuary estate to the testator’s executors, Mr. Sands and Mr. Edgar, individually, free and clear of any trust or use whatsoever.
    
      George TV. Wickersham, and Thomas B. Gilchrist for appellant.
    
      Francis M. Scott, Middleton S. Borland and Charles H. Edwards for plaintiffs, respondents.
    
      Charles Howland Russell, Grenville T. Emmet, John F. Curran, Joseph H. Choate, Jr., Sinclair Hamilton, Charles E. Hotchkiss and Sydney G. Soons for defendants, respondents.
    
      Charles D. Newton, Attorney-General (.Robert P. Beyer of counsel), for Attorney-General, respondent.
   Judgment affirmed, with costs; no opinion.

Concur: Hiscock, Ch. J., Chase, Collin, Hogan, McLaughlin, Crane and Andrews, JJ.