From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Schmitt v. Stoss

Court of Appeals of the State of New York
Feb 14, 1913
100 N.E. 1119 (N.Y. 1913)

Opinion

Submitted February 10, 1913

Decided February 14, 1913

Uriah W. Tompkins for motion.

Alexander Thain opposed.


The personal representatives of the deceased plaintiff and not his heirs at law should be substituted. Leases for years are deemed assets and go to the personal representatives for distribution as a part of the personal estate of the deceased. (Code Civ. Pro. § 2712.) They are expressly excepted from the term "real property" as defined by section 80 of the Decedent Estate Law. The context and reference to section 27, 1 R.S. 754, pt. 2, ch. 2, from which the section was derived, removes whatever doubt the punctuation might create on that point.

The motion is denied, with ten dollars costs.

CULLEN, Ch. J., GRAY, WILLARD BARTLETT, CHASE, CUDDEBACK, HOGAN and MILLER, JJ., concur.

Motion denied.


Summaries of

Schmitt v. Stoss

Court of Appeals of the State of New York
Feb 14, 1913
100 N.E. 1119 (N.Y. 1913)
Case details for

Schmitt v. Stoss

Case Details

Full title:IGNATZ SCHMITT, Respondent, v . KATHINKA STOSS, Appellant

Court:Court of Appeals of the State of New York

Date published: Feb 14, 1913

Citations

100 N.E. 1119 (N.Y. 1913)
207 N.Y. 731

Citing Cases

Putch v. Jacard Realty Co.

The sole legal issue to be determined is whether or not the occupancy of the apartment by the plaintiff and…

Matter of Miller

Inasmuch as nothing in the circumstances surrounding the execution of any testamentary paper can evidence a…