Opinion · Nylaw New York

THIERINGER v. FUERST, 196 App. Div. 902 (1921)

MARY LOUISE THIERINGER, Plaintiff, v. WILLIAM F. FUERST, Defendant., 196 A.D. 902 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department. 1921)

Type: Opinion
Court: Nylaw New York
Jurisdiction: Nylaw
Date: 1921-01-01
Topic: general

THIERINGER v. FUERST, 196 App. Div. 902 (1921) MARY LOUISE THIERINGER, Plaintiff, v. WILLIAM F. FUERST, Defendant.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department.

Citator

UpLaw has not yet analyzed THIERINGER v. FUERST, 196 App. Div. 902 (1921). The absence of a flag is not a finding that it is good law.

THIERINGER v. FUERST,196 App. Div. 902(1921)

MARY LOUISE THIERINGER, Plaintiff, v. WILLIAM F. FUERST, Defendant.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department.

March, 1921.

In view of the facts that the testator was an aged man, who could not read the English language, that the specific devise to his daughter was by words "house lot," by which designation the whole of the premises in question had been known in the family for many years, and that error might easily creep into a specification of the dimensions, dictated to a draftsman by a testator who could not read English, we are of opinion that it was the intent of the testator to devise to his daughter the whole lot known as the "house lot." Jenks, P.J., Rich, Blackmar and Jaycox, JJ., concur; Putnam, J., concurs in the result, being in doubt if the specific devise covered the entire lot, but if not so, that plaintiff takes the remaining portion under the sixth (residuary) clause of the will. Judgment for plaintiff, without costs, in accordance with the terms of the submission.