Judges: Moss
Filed Date: 8/18/1961
Status: Precedential
Modified Date: 10/19/2024
The executors herein have filed their account and a petition for its judicial settlement. Two questions are presented for determination: whether the bequest to “ a Home for the Aged in Israel, within the discretion of my trustees ”, to which certain conditions are attached, is a valid charitable gift and, if so, whether the total gifts to such charity exceed the permissible amount provided in section 17 of the Decedent Estate Law, and to what extent.
Testatrix died a resident of Kings County and left surviving a son and a daughter as her only distributees. Her will, after bequests of some small general legacies, directs division of her residuary estate into two equal parts. One of such parts she directs her trustees to hold and from the principal and income to pay to her son a specified annual amount during his life. On his death the remainder, if any, of such fund is to be added to the gift of the other one half of the residuary. The other half of the residuary is to be paid over to a home for the aged in Israel, as set forth above.
The trustees have selected an institution in Israel, within the class designated by the testatrix, and the institution has agreed to accept the gift and comply with the conditions in the will. The Attorney-General of the State of New York has approved the action of the trustees.
The legacy was for a charitable purpose and the fact that the trustees were clothed with a broad discretion in selecting the beneficiary within the framework of the will did not invalidate the gift (Matter of Michaels, 7 Misc 2d 439). Where the charitable purpose of a testator is evident from the provisions of a will, the courts will strain to sustain a legacy to charity (Matter of Ablett, 206 Misc. 157, affd. 2 A D 2d 205, affd. 3 N Y 2d 261; Matter of Kashiwabara, 11 Misc 2d 426; Matter of Fanelli, 207 Misc. 719). The legacy bequeathed under paragraph ‘ ‘ sixth ’ ’ of the will is for a charitable purpose and is valid and is not violative of the Eule against Perpetuities (Matter of Osborn, 169 Misc. 54; Allen v. Stevens, 161 N. Y. 122; Personal Property Law, §§ 11,12; Matter of Reese, 21 Misc 2d 29).
The second question for determination is whether the gift to charity exceeds one half of the estate of testatrix under section 17 of the Decedent Estate Law. The executors’ account discloses that the gross estate accounted for is $33,934.73 and since testatrix left no debts the maximum permissible gift to
Interest on the residuary gifts shall be applied thereon at the rate earned computed from seven months after the issuance of letters testamentary (Matter of Matz, 12 Misc 2d 966), except that no interest may be allowed as to future payment of such share as may be applied out of the annuity created thereunder, which share is subject to statutory provision that no allowance of interest may be made for period of postponement of payment (Decedent Estate Law, § 17). The compensation of the attorney for the executors is fixed in the sum of $3,000.