Legal Opinion
In re the Judicial Settlement of Account of Proceedings of Frank
New York Surrogate's Court
Decided May 7, 1928PublishedCited by 2 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Schulz, S.
This was a proceeding brought for a compulsory accounting. Objections were filed by Joseph Roos, one of the parties, and upon the hearing it was stipulated that these objections should be considered as also having been filed on behalf of Alexander Roos, another of the persons interested.
It appeared that the accounting executrix had paid to herself the sum of $1,284.99 on account of a debt alleged to be due to her. This she had no right to do until the same was proved to and allowed by the surrogate (Surrogate’s Court Act, § 212, subd. 4; cases cited in Matter of Carlson, 132 Misc.…
2Cases cited17 opinions
- McKeon v. . Van SlyckNew York Court of Appeals · 1918
- Dillon v. . AndersonNew York Court of Appeals · 1870
- Kearney v. . McKeonNew York Court of Appeals · 1881
- Collyer v. . CollyerNew York Court of Appeals · 1889
- Hurd v. . KellyNew York Court of Appeals · 1879
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- Carrara v. CarraraNew York Supreme Court · 1961
- Kranze v. Cinecolor Corp.District Court, S.D. New York · 1951