# In Re the Estate of Wilson

> New York Court of Appeals · July 12, 1983 · 59 N.Y.2d 461

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9786388

## Case

- **Full name:** In the Matter of the Estate of Clark W. Wilson, Deceased. Key Bank Et Al., Respondents; State of New York Et Al., Appellants. in the Matter of the Estate of Edwin I. Johnson, Deceased. Robert Abrams, as Attorney-General of the State of New York, Respondent; Jonathan G. Blattmachr, Appellant
- **Court:** New York Court of Appeals
- **Decided:** July 12, 1983
- **Citations:** 59 N.Y.2d 461; 465 N.Y.S.2d 900; 452 N.E.2d 1228; 1983 N.Y. LEXIS 3192
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Concurrence by Meyer
- **Judges:** Cooke, Meyer
- **Cited by:** 34 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9786388

## How later opinions describe it (automated extraction)

- finding that a trust provision requiring a school district to certify a list of students eligible for a scholarship was “an incidental part of the trust’s administrative requirements” where “[t]he same result intended by the testator may be accomplished by permitting the stude…

## Opinion text

Meyer, J.
(concurring in Matter of Wilson and dissenting in Matter of Johnson). I would affirm in both cases. Although the Constitution does not proscribe private bias, it does proscribe affirmative State action in furtherance of bias.
In Matter of Wilson the trust is private and the only involvement of a public official (the superintendent of schools) is his certification of a student’s class standing, *481 information which is, in any event, available to any student applying to the trustee for a scholarship. There is, therefore, no State action.
In Matter of Johnson, however, the trustee is the board of education, a public body. The establishment of a public trust for a discriminatory purpose is constitutionally improper, as Presiding Justice Mollen has fully spelled out in his opinion. For the State to legitimize that impropriety by replacement of the trustee is unconstitutional State action. The only permissible corrective court action is, as the Appellate Division held, excision of the discriminatory limitation.
In Matter of Wilson:
Judges Jasen, Jones, Wachtler, Meyer and Simons concur with Chief Judge Cooke; Judge Meyer concurs in a memorandum.
Order affirmed, etc.
In Matter of Johnson:
Judges Jasen, Jones, Wachtler and Simons concur with Chief Judge Cooke; Judge Meyer dissents and votes to affirm in a memorandum.
Order reversed, etc.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9786388. Public record. Not legal advice.