The Bridgeport evening farmer., 1911-06-21
MRS. I. |. WATT WANTS S900,OO0
Suit Over Pinkney Estate Begun
 in Supreme Court
Julia Watt Morris CurtiSS Law.
 renee Interested

For the first time in many months former Ambassador to England. Jo- seph H. Choate appeared in the New York Supreme Court in a lawsuit, yes terday, as counsel before Justice Bis chof in Special Term, Part III, in a suit involving the construction and distribution of parts of the estate of the late Miss Mary G. Pinkney. Re gently the estate was appraised at a net valuation of $6,6S0, 0,629.7S. The to- tai transfer tax was placed at S319.- O2S.17
 MT. Choate was, counsel for the wid- oW of Thomas l.. Watt, who died af- ter Miss Pinkney's death. He inher- ited one-fourth of the residuary es- tate.
 The appraisal of the estate placed the value of Thomas l.. Watts share at S2,6S0, 273. 90.
 MT. Choate's legal efforts were di- rected to causing the Court to rule that Mrs. Thomas L. Watt was en- titled to nearly $9OO, ,OO0 of her hus> bands share of the estate outright instead of to merely her dover right. which is the income from third of the real estate for life. The Pink ney estate is that from which; come the millions of Julia Watt Morris Cur tiss Lawrence of New York and Fair field.
  to Justice Bischoff to-day was wheth- CT or not the one-fourth share of the Pinkney estate left to Thomas L. Watt was to be considered as real es- tate or as personal property. Thomas l.. Watt died without will and if the share of the Pinkney estate was held to be real estate then his widow would be entitled to but her dover right. namely. one-third of the income for life. If, on the other hand it was held to be personal property then her share would be one-third absolutely, amounting to nearly s900,000
 Another question was whether or nct the large transfer inheritance tax .'.>.s to be paid by the executors as charge upon the estate or whether it was to be apportioned among the lega- tees and 1evisees
 Abram I: Elkus. counsel for the ex- ecutors, began the argument. He outlined the various propositions to the Court and said that his clients were anxious to have them decided by the Court in construing the will.
 He said that the share of the Thom- as l.. Watt inheritance to be paid to the State on account of the inheri- tance tax was S36, ,O00 He declared that if the Court held that the share which passed to Thomas L. Watt was real estate that the widow was entitl- GU lO put Ter uOW6T TlSHIS.
 Tn her will Miss Pinkney referred to the residuary estate as both real and personal estate. Most of the large estate consisted of real estate, but large portion of it has been sold and reduced to cash
 Under many circumstances money realized from the sale of real estate has been held to be real estate for purposes of disposition.
 By her will Miss Pinkney directed that part of her residuary estate should be held in trust for certain purposes and that other portions should be distributed absolutely.
 The one-fourth share to Thomas l.. Watt was to go to him absolutely and there were provisions for the dis tribution of the residuary estate which it was said, that MT. Choate contend ed made it personal property.
 Thomas l.. Watt left four children who will share in his estate equally subject to whatever rights the widow may be found to have.