Opinion
February, 1936.
Appeal from Surrogate's Court, Kings County.
Present — Young, Carswell, Davis, Adel and Taylor, JJ. [ 154 Misc. 480.]
We are of opinion that in this case there was a gift over to persons definitely named as entitled to the residue. (See Matter of Vandevort, 62 Hun, 612; Matter of Arrowsmith, 162 App. Div. 623; affd., 213 N.Y. 704; Hogan v. Curtin, 88 id. 162.)