Case Name: Elizabeth Mount, Appellant, v. Richard H. Mount et al., Respondents, and Clarence M. Davis et al., Appellants
Court: New York Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 1922-10-27
Citations: 234 N.Y. 568
Docket Number: 
Parties: Elizabeth Mount, Appellant, v. Richard H. Mount et al., Respondents, and Clarence M. Davis et al., Appellants.
Judges: 
Reporter: New York Reports
Volume: 234
Pages: 568–569

Head Matter:
Elizabeth Mount, Appellant, v. Richard H. Mount et al., Respondents, and Clarence M. Davis et al., Appellants.
Will — construction — objection that provisions oj_ will violated statute against perpetuities.
Mount v. Mount, 196 App. Div. 508, affirmed.
(Argued October 10, 1922;
decided October 27, 1922.)
Appeal from a judgment of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the first judicial department, entered December 21, 1921, which modified and affirmed as modified a judgment entered upon a decision of the court on trial at Special Term construing the will of Charlotte A. Mount, deceased. Testatrix by the seventh clause of her will devised certain real property to trustees to pay the income to a named beneficiary during her life with remainder to her issue, if any, and if she died without issue the property to pass under the residuary clause of her will. By said residuary clause she gave the residue of her estate to trustees to pay the income to her sister Susan during her life and upon her death divide the principal into as many parts as would make one for each of the living children of her nephew and one for the collective issue of each child that may be dead leaving issue, the income from the shares of the living children to be paid to them and the principal distributed to their issue upon their death and directing distribution of the principal of the shares assigned to issue of children that might be dead amongst said children upon their attaining the age of twenty-five years. At the death of testatrix the nephew had two children living, both of whom survive, and two children were thereafter born to him. The court held that the seventh clause was invalid as to all attempted disposition made after the death of the sister Susan and that under the ninth clause the two children of the nephew were each entitled to a life estate in one-half of the trust fund. (See 185 N. Y. 162.)
William H. Hamilton and Norman C. Conklin for plaintiff, appellant.
David B. Simpson for Clarence M. Davis et al., defendants, appellants.
Samuel Crook for Elizabeth Mount, as executrix of Maria L. Mount, deceased, defendant, appellant.
Howard C. Taylor for Alice DeGray Desvernine et al., defendants, appellants.
James A. O’Gorman, Lanman Crosby and Almuth C. Vandiver for Frances DeG. Mount et al., respondents.
Clarence J. Hand and Joseph M. Adrian for trustees of Charlotte A. Mount, deceased, respondents.
John M. Perry for Elizabeth J. Mount, respondent.
Addison A. Van Tine for Helen R. Leslie, as executrix of Charles J. Leslie, deceased, respondent.

Opinion:
Judgment affirmed, with costs; no opinion.
Concur: Hiscock, Ch. J., Hogan, Cardozo, Pound,. McLaughlin, Crane and Andrews, JJ.