Legal Opinion

In re the Estate of Kennedy

New York Surrogate's Court

Decided October 16, 1933PublishedCited by 12 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Wingate, S.

The present application to compel the filing of a bond by an executrix who has qualified and has for some time been acting under a will expressly stipulating that no security be required of her, runs counter to the familiar principle that “ the courts will not undertake to make a better will nor name a better executor for the testator.” (Matter of Leland, 219 N. Y. 387, 393.) As is said in Matter of Bergdorf (206 N. Y. 309, 312): “ The intent of a testator as to how, when and by whom his estate shall be conserved, paid out and distributed will be, if needs be, strenuously searched…

2Cases cited12 opinions

  1. In Re the Several Accountings of the Executors of TildenNew York Court of Appeals · 1885
  2. In Re Proving the Will of BergdorfNew York Court of Appeals · 1912
  3. In Re Proving the Will of LelandNew York Court of Appeals · 1916
  4. Hartnett v. . WandellNew York Court of Appeals · 1875
  5. In re the Estate of WalshNew York Surrogate's Court · 1933

7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by12 opinions

  1. In re the Estate of CurleyNew York Surrogate's Court · 1934
  2. In re the Estate of DraskeNew York Surrogate's Court · 1936
  3. In re the Estate of JadwinNew York Surrogate's Court · 1969
  4. In re the Estate of ClarkNew York Surrogate's Court · 1938
  5. In re the Estate of ZalewskiNew York Surrogate's Court · 1941

7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API