Keppelman v. Keppelman

• Citation: 103 A. 27
• Decision Date: 02 February 1918
• Docket Number: No. 44/309.,44/309.
• Parties: KEPPELMAN et al. v. KEPPELMAN et al.
• Court: New Jersey Court of Chancery

103 A. 27

KEPPELMAN et al.

v. KEPPELMAN et al.

No. 44/309.

Court of Chancery of New Jersey.

Feb. 2, 1918.

Bill between Albert J. Keppelman and others, trustees under the last will and testament of Adolphus Keppelman, and Erich P. Keppelman and others. On motion on behalf of the alien property custodian of the United States to strike out a portion of the bill. Motion carried over until final hearing.

Carrick & Wortendyke and Charles L. Carrick, all of Jersey City, and Herbert J. Hannoch, of Newark, for A. Mitchell Palmer, alien property custodian, for the motion. Edward M. & Runyon Colie, of Newark (Edward M. Colie, of Newark), for complainants. Martin V. Bergen, of Camden, and Ruby R. Vale, of Philadelphia, Pa., for Schulz & Ruckgaber.

LANE, V. C. This is a motion made on behalf of the alien property custodian to strike out a portion of the bill of complaint.

The bill was filed by trustees acting under the last will and testament of Adolphus Keppelman. By the will three citizens and residents of the German Empire, among others, were made beneficiaries. The bill is filed for the purpose of obtaining a construction of the will so that it may be ascertained how much should ultimately be paid by the trustees to the respective beneficiaries. Before the funds can be distributed there must be a final hearing. Prior to the declaration of war, the beneficiaries, alien enemies, executed powers of attorney to the defendants Schulz & Ruckgaber, bankers and citizens of this country. The powers authorize Schulz & Ruckgaber to collect such sums of money as might become due to the alien enemies under the will, to execute releases and re funding bonds, to collect income upon securities and generally to act for the beneficiaries in the matter of the estate. The bill in its fourteenth paragraph charges that Scnulz & Ruckgaber have given notice to the complainants that they claim the right to receive, by virtue of the powers of attorney, the shares of the alien enemies, and that A. Mitchell Palmer, custodian of alien property, also claims the right to receive the shares, that the trustees are doubtful as to whom to pay, and for their protection they pray the direction of the court.

It is conceded by counsel for the alien property custodian that for his protection it is necessary that there should be a final decree determining the amount which should ultimately be paid. The motion amounts in its last analysis to an attempt to exclude from the cause on the motion...