Yivo Institute for Jewish Research v. Zaleski
Maryland Court of Appeals
874 A.2d 411 (2005)
- Written by Sean Carroll, JD
Facts
Dr. Jan Karski wrote a letter to the YIVO Institute for Jewish Research (YIVO) (plaintiff), agreeing to create an endowment of $100,000 for an annual $5,000 award for Polish Jewish authors. The letter stated that the endowment would consist of a gift in Karski’s will, or in cash or securities during his lifetime. In Karski’s will, executed the following year, Karski left to YIVO his shares in the Northern States Power Company (Northern Power), which were worth approximately $100,000. In the years before he died, Karski made a series of gifts of stocks in other companies to YIVO. The total value of the stocks was $99,997.69. Soon after the final stock gift, Karski gifted YIVO $2.31 to bring the total value of gifts to $100,000. Karski did not amend his will. At Karski’s death, the Northern Power shares remained in the estate and were worth over $100,000. Paul Zaleski (defendant), Karski’s personal representative, denied YIVO’s request for the Northern Power stock, stating that the bequest had been adeemed by Karski’s inter vivos gifts to YIVO. YIVO filed a petition in court seeking the stock. The Montgomery County Orphans’ Court denied YIVO’s petition. The Maryland Court of Appeals granted YIVO’s petition for certiorari.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Greene, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 804,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.