Hill v. Nelson
New York Surrogate's Court
On the settlement of the decree in this matter, a question arose ■ as to whether the executors were entitled to commissions on a sum amounting to about $80,000, which the beneficiaries under the will had received from the testator in his lifetime, or which he was liable to pay for them, and concerning which he provided in his will as follows: 6£ 14th.
Read the full summary
On the settlement of the decree in this matter, a question arose ■ as to whether the executors were entitled to commissions on a sum amounting to about $80,000, which the beneficiaries under the will had received from the testator in his lifetime, or which he was liable to pay for them, and concerning which he provided in his will as follows: 6£ 14th. As I have made very considerable advances to my children, and to the husbands of some of my daughters, and as I may continue to make such advances hereafter,—and have or may become liable or responsible for certain of my children or their…
1Opinion of the Court
The Surrogate.
The claim of the executors for commissions on the $80,000 in question cannot be sustained. They neither, in fact, received that sum of money, nor paid it out. It was a mere matter of figuring that devolved upon them. What happened was a computation of balances, and the process was one of account, rather than the receipt and payment of money. To allow commissions upon this class of items would be to give them upon receipts and disbursements having only a constructive and not an actual existence (Attorney-General v.. North Am. Life Ins. Co., 89 N. Y, 94-105).
As to the question of…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Schenck v. . DartNew York Court of Appeals · 1860
3Cited by1 opinion
- Willett's EstateNew York Surrogate's Court · 1888