Case ID: ny_225/html/0630-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Mary F. Springsteen, Appellant, v. Walter F. Springsteen et al., Respondents.
    
      Springsteen v. Springsteen, 172 App. Div. 605, affirmed.
    (Submitted November 22, 1918;
    decided December 10, 1918.)
    Appeal from a judgment of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the second judicial department, entered June 12, 1916, modifying and affirming as modified a judgment in favor of plaintiff entered upon a decision of the court on trial at Special Term in an action for the admeasurement of dower. The question was: If a widow, rather than a stranger, is given a fife estate in specific real estate, does that fact prevent her from collecting her dower in the same property, payable out of either the specific real estate or the personalty? The Special Term held that plaintiff had a fife estate- and also a dower interest which she was entitled to collect by a sale of the equity (i. e., the fee subject to the fife estate), and if enough was not realized from that source, to collect the deficit from the residuary estate (personalty). The Appellate Division modified the decree by holding that while plaintiff was entitled to both the fife estate and the dower, they were co-existent, and the dower could not be collected from any source.
    
      Alexander S. Bacon for appellant.
    
      Edward D. Kenyon and Frank W. Harris for respondents.
   Judgment affirmed, with costs; no opinion.

Concur: Hiscock, Ch. J., Collin, Cuddeback, Cardozo, Pound, Crane and Andrews, JJ.