Case Name: SCHWARTZ v. REHFUSS
Court: New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 1908-12-30
Citations: 114 N.Y.S. 92
Docket Number: 
Parties: SCHWARTZ v. REHFUSS.
Judges: 
Reporter: West's New York Supplement
Volume: 114
Pages: 92–95

Head Matter:
SCHWARTZ v. REHFUSS.
(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department.
December 30, 1908.)
1. Wrens (§ 634 )—Construction—Contingent Remainder—ContingencySurvivorship.
Where property was devised to testator’s wife for life, and at her death to his children, and, in case any of the children should have died leaving issue, the share of such child to vest in his issue, but if any child died without issue, his share to vest in his surviving brothers and sisters, the intention was that if any of the children died before the life tenant, leaving issue, his share should vest in his issue, and the property vested in the children on testator’s death subject to being divested by failure to survive' the life tenant.
[Ed. Note.—For other cases, see Wills, Cent. Dig. § 1498; Dec. Dig. § 634.*]
2. " Remainders (§ 14*) — Conveyance by Remainderman — Contingent Remainders.
Where the title of remaindermen under a will was subject to be divested by a failure to survive the life tenant, a purchaser from the remaindermen took no greater title than his grantors could convey.
[Ed. Note.—For other cases, see Remainders, Cent.. Dig. § 10; Dec. Dig. § 14.*]
3. Mortgages (§ 534*)—Foreclosure—Rights of Purchaser.
A mortgagee, upon foreclosure and purchase, gets no better title than that held by his mortgagor.
[Ed. Note.—For other cases, see Mortgages, Cent. Dig. § 1555; Dec. Dig. § 534. ]
Gaynor and Jenks, JJ., dissenting.
Action by Annie Schwartz against Jacob Rehfuss to compel specific performance of a contract to purchase. Judgment for defendant.
Argued before WOODWARD, JENKS, GAYNOR, RICH, and MILLER, JJ.
C. W. Wilson, Jr., for plaintiff.
Hugo Hirsh (Ferd. W. Buermeyer, on the brief), for defendant.
For other oases see same topic & § number in Dec. & Am. Digs. 1907 to date, & Rep’r Indexes
For other cases see same topic & § number in Dec. & Am. Digs. 1907 to date, & Rep’r Indexes

Opinion:
RICH, J.
It appears that Flerman Dale died on the 8th day of November, 1905, seised in fee of a certain piece or parcel of real property situate in the borough of Brooklyn, New York, leaving a widow, Sophia Dale, and four children, Aldrich J. Dale, Charles H. Dale, Emma V. Leimdorfer, and Elvina F. Diamond, his only heirs at law and next of kin. He left a last will and testament, which has been duly admitted to probate, paragraphs 3 and 4 of which are the only ones material to this controversy, and are as follows:
"Third. All the rest, residue and remainder of my estate, real and personal, and wheresoever situated, I give, devise and bequeath to my wife Sophia Dale for and during her natural life.
"Fourth. At the death of my said wife Sophia Dale, I give, devise and bequeath all my property, real and personal, and wheresoever situated, to my children Emma V. Leimdorfer, Aldrich J. Dale, Elvina F. Dale and Charles H. Dale, share and share alike, to have and to hold the same to them and their heirs and assigns forever, and in case any of my said children shall have died leaving issue, the share of the child so dying shall descend to and vest in his or her issue, and in case of the death of any child without leaving issue his or her share shall descend to and vest in his or her surviving brothers and sisters."
On the 38th day of March, 1907, the widow and the four children conveyed the said premises to Aaron Potruch, who thereafter executed a mortgage thereon to the plaintiff, which was subsequently duly foreclosed and purchased by her upon the foreclosure sale. The plaintiff thereafter entered into a written agreement with the defendant, whereby she agreed to sell, and the defendant agreed to purchase, said premises. At the time fixed for closing the title, the widow, Sophia Dale, was still living, and the defendant refused to take the title tendered and to perform the contract, on the ground that plaintiff did not have a good title to the land contracted to be conveyed, for the reason that, under the fourth clause of the will of Herman Dale, the interest of his children in the real estate was subject to being divested by their deaths prior to that of his wife, Sophia Dale, and that until the happening of the latter event it could not be determined who were the proper parties to convey good title to the premises.
The intention of the testator is expressed in language so clear that but one interpretation is possible, and, as we are to give effect to this intent, our duty is clear. By the fourth paragraph the testator, in giving his residuary estate to his four children, intended to provide that in. case any of his children should die before the decease of his wife, Sophia Dale, leaving issue, the share of the child so dying "shall descend to and vest in his or her issue." Upon his death the real estate in question vested in the children, subject to their being divested by their not surviving the life tenant. Potruch took no greater interest in the premises than his grantors had power to convey, and it was therefore liable to be divested by this contingency. The title of Annie Schwartz under the foreclosure was no better than that obtained by Potruch, and it follows that the plaintiff was unable to give a good title to the property, and judgment may be entered in favor of the defendant in accordance with the terms of the stipulation. See Lyons v. Ostrander, 167 N. Y. 135, 60 N. E. 334; Flanagan v. Staples, 38 App. Div. 319, 51 N. Y. Supp. 10.
WOODWARD and MILLER, JJ., concur. GAYNOR, J., reads for judgment for the plaintiff, with whom JENKS, J., concurs.