van Syckel v. van Syckel

Decision Date20 February 1893
Citation51 N.J.E. 191,26 A. 156
PartiesVAN SYCKEL v. VAN SYCKEL et al.
CourtNew Jersey Court of Chancery

Bill in equity by Sarah E. Van Syckel to obtain a share of the proceeds arising from the sale of land devised by a will under which petitioner alleges that she is a beneficiary. Bill dismissed.

Martin Wyckoff, for petitioner.

John A. Bullock, for respondents.

GREEN, V. C. John Van Syckel, late of the county of Hunterdon, deceased, in and by his last will and testament, made provision for his son, Elijah, for life, hereinafter set out in full. At the date of the will and death of the testator, Elijah had a wife living, named Hannah Van Syckel. After the death of the testator, Hannah Van Syckel died, and Elijah afterwards married the petitioner, Sarah E. Van Syckel, and afterwards Elijah died. The provision of the will is as follows: "I give and devise unto Bennett Van Syckel and Joseph Van Syckel. sons of my brother Aaron, and John Van Syckel, my grandson, (trustees,) and the survivors and survivor of them, all that portion of the farm whereon I now live which lies on the side of the public road leading from the Baptist church to the bridge over Big brook, near my house, and on the north side of said Big brook, after it leaves said bridge, containing about ninety-two acres of land, and also that lot of woodland lying in the township of Bethlehem, adjoining land of William Martin and others, and containing 40 acres of land, more or less, for and during the lifetime of my son, Elijah Van Syckel, in trust, nevertheless, that the said trustees, or the survivors or survivor of them, will, during the lifetime of my said son, Elijah, permit him to occupy, possess, and enjoy the said farm of ninety-two acres, more or less, and receive the rents, issues, and profits thereof, and that they, or the survivors fir survivor of them, will permit the said Elijah to take from said wood lot as many rails, from time to time, as may be necessary to keep the said farm in good fence, and as much firewood as he may need for family use. But it is my express will that the said Elijah shall have no control whatever over said farm and wood lot, except such as said trustees shall give him, and have no right or power of disposition or of incumbering the said farm or wood lot; and at the death of my said son, Elijah, 1 give and devise the said farm and wood lot to the children and wife of my said son, Elijah, share and share alike,—that is to say, each child to have the same share as the wife; the legal representatives of a deceased child to take the parent's share." The real estate limited over was sold for $5,270.22, and this amount of the purchase money paid into court. John Van Syckel, a son of Elijah Van Syckel, was declared a bankrupt, and his interest in the devise was sold to George A. Allen, who is since deceased; Mary B. Allen, Charles W. Allen, Alexander B. Allen, and Edward B. Allen being entitled to any interest which the said George A. Allen, deceased, acquired by the purchase of the said bankrupt's interest. The surviving children of Elijah Van Syckel, and the children of any child who had died, with the Aliens, applied to this court for an order for the payment to them of the fund in court; and an order was made directing said payment, which has been made in pursuance thereof. Sarah E. Van Syckel, the widow of Elijah, thereupon filed this petition, alleging that the said order had been improvidently made, and that the same was a fraud upon her rights, claiming that, under the terms of the will before quoted, she, as the wife of Elijah Van Syckel, was entitled to an equal share of the proceeds of the said land, and, further, that the Aliens were not entitled to any portion thereof.

The question presented, therefore, is whether she comes under the following provision of the will, namely: "And at the death of my said son, Elijah, 1 give and devise the said farm and wood lot to the children and wife...

To continue reading

Request your trial
9 cases
  • Erny's Trust, In re
    • United States
    • Pennsylvania Supreme Court
    • July 1, 1964
    ...Niblock, 39 Eng.Reprint 240; Beers v. Narramore, 61 Conn. 13, 22 A. 1061; Johnson v. Webber, 65 Conn. 501, 33 A. 506; Van Syckel v. Van Syckel, 51 N.J.Eq. 194, 26 A. 156; Hill v. Aldrich, 326 Mass. 630, 96 N.E.2d 147; Re Schluechterer's Estate, Sur., 90 N.Y.S.2d 867; Gannett v. Shepley, 351......
  • In re Erny's Trust
    • United States
    • Pennsylvania Supreme Court
    • July 1, 1964
    ...Niblock, 39 Eng.Reprint 240; Beers v. Narramore, 61 Conn. 13, 22 A. 1061; Johnson v. Webber, 65 Conn. 501, 33 A. 506; Van Syckel v. Van Syckel, 51 N.J.Eq. 194, 26 A. 156; Hill Aldrich, 326 Mass. 630, 96 N.E.2d 147; Re Schluechterer's Estate, Sur., 90 N.Y.S.2d 867; Gannett v. Shepley, 351 Mo......
  • Scullin v. Mercantile-Commerce Bank & Trust Co., MERCANTILE-COMMERCE
    • United States
    • Missouri Supreme Court
    • December 11, 1950
    ...would have upon his son for support and assistance, it was held that the word 'wife' included a second wife. In Van Syckel v. Van Syckel, 51 N.J.Eq. 194, 26 A. 156, 157, it was held that a provision giving certain property, after the death of testator's son, 'to the children and wife of my ......
  • Hill v. Aldrich
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts Supreme Court
    • January 3, 1951
    ...[1903] 2 Ch. 102; Willis v. Hendry, 127 Conn. 653, 672, 20 A.2d 375; Gannett v. Shepley, 351 Mo. 286, 172 S.W.2d 857; Van Syckel v. Van Syckel, 51 N.J.Eq. 194, 26 A. 156; Van Brunt v. Van Brunt, 111 N.Y. 178, 19 N.E. 60. Compare Williams v. Fundingsland, 74 Colo. 315, 321, 221 P. 1084, 63 A......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT