In re the Judicial Settlement of the Account of Proceedings of Davis
Opinion of the Court
The codicil to the last will and testament of the decedent executed more than ten years after her will, contains a bequest of a diamond ring to a legatee therein named. Immediately thereafter is a provision, as follows: βThe remainder of my jewelry to be sold and the money derived from the sale to be added to the principal.β In her will the decedent had bequeathed other articles of jewelry to persons therein named, and the question involved is whether or not the codicil revoked such legacies.
There are no words of revocation contained in the codicil and the two documents must be read together (Westcott v. Cady, 5 Johns. Ch. 334, 343; Crozier v. Bray, 120 N. Y. 366, 374; Herzog v. Title Guarantee & Trust Co. of New York, 177 id. 86) and effect given to both, if possible. Chew v. Sheldon, 214 N. Y. 344, 350; Hard v. Ashley, 117 id. 606, 613. The will remains effective except in so far as the provisions contained in the codicil are inconsistent with those of the will. Newcomb v. Webster, 113 N. Y. 191; Osburn v. Rochester Trust & Safe Deposit Co., 152 App. Div. 235, 239.
In view of the fact that the codicil repeats the bequest of the
Costs awarded to the petitioner and the respondent payable out of the estate.
Decreed accordingly.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.