Legal Opinion

Hall v. Dusenbury

New York Supreme Court

Decided October 15, 1885Published

Appeal from an order of the surrogate denying an application for an order under section 2717 of the Code of Civil Procedure.

1Opinion of the Court

Pee Cueiam :

The surrogate denied the motion upon the ground that the* case was not one within the provisions of sections 2717, 2718 of the Code of Civil Procedure. On deciding the case the-surrogate pronounced an opinion which in part, is as follows :

Rollins, S. — William W. Dusenbury, as administrator of this estate, has appeared in response to a citation directing him to show cause why he should not pay to the petitioners, attorneys-at-law, two several judgments for costs recovered against him as such administrator, and in favor of petitioner’s clients Charles Dusenbury and Benjamin H.…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Bulkley v. StaatsNew York Surrogate's Court · 1881

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API