In re the Est. of Sparacio, 391 N.E.2d 296 (NY 1979). · Go Syfert
Search
In re the Est. of Sparacio, 391 N.E.2d 296 (NY 1979). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
9 citation events across 4 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: Bobal v. Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute (ca2, 1990-10-22)
Top citers, strongest first. 2 distinct citers. How cited ↗
discussed Cited "see, e.g." Bobal v. Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute
2d Cir. · 1990 · signal: see, e.g. · confidence low
See, e.g., Williamson, Picket, Gross, Inc. v. 400 Park Avenue Co., 63 A.D.2d 880 , 405 N.Y.S.2d 709 (1st Dep't 1978), aff'd, 47 N.Y.2d 769 , 417 N.Y.S.2d 460 , 391 N.E.2d 296 (1979); Rosenberg v. Del-Mar Division, 56 A.D.2d 576 , 391 N.Y.S.2d 452 (2d Dep't 1977).
discussed Cited "see, e.g." Bobal v. Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute
2d Cir. · 1990 · signal: see, e.g. · confidence low
See, e.g., Williamson, Picket, Gross, Inc. v. 400 Park Avenue Co., 63 A.D.2d 880 , 405 N.Y.S.2d 709 (1st Dep’t 1978), aff'd, 47 N.Y.2d 769 , 417 N.Y.S.2d 460 , 391 N.E.2d 296 (1979); Rosenberg v. Del-Mar Division, 56 A.D.2d 576 , 391 N.Y.S.2d 452 (2d Dep’t 1977).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
In the Matter of the Estate of Charles M. Sparacio, Also Known as Salvatore M. Sparacio, Mary Sparacio, Respondent Eileen Maroshick
New York Court of Appeals.
May 3, 1979.
391 N.E.2d 296
APPEARANCES OF COUNSEL, Bernard Meyerson and Herman M. Goldberg for appellant., Roy Rudd and John G. Nicholas for respondent.
Cited by 2 opinions  |  Published

OPINION OF THE COURT

Memorandum.

The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed, with costs to all parties appearing separately and filing separate briefs payable out of the estate.

We agree that the testamentary disposition in this instance was precatory rather than mandatory. The testator, knowledgeable in matters of legal drafting, chose to employ the classic words of precatory import — "wish and desire”. Additionally, the substantive disposition is internally incongruous with a testamentary mandate; the ultimate distribution was not to daughter and friend "in equal shares” but "as in their mutual agreement they decide” — an apportionment impossible of judicial implementation.

Chief Judge Cooke and Judges Jasen, Gabrielli, Jones, Wachtler and Fuchsberg concur in memorandum.

Order affirmed, etc.