In re Schrauth
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
1Opinion of the Court
Decree of the Surrogate’s Court of Dutchess county unanimously affirmed, without costs. Mr. Haas was retained as attorney for the executors, and not as attorney for the estate. There can be no such retainer as attorney for an estate. There may be no substitution, however, of an attorney to replace Mr. Haas as attorney for the executrix except m a pending proceeding. The only proceeding pending at the time of the application was the one in which the widow sought to assert her right of election. She was represented by her own attorney in that matter. Mr. Haas purported to represent the estate…
2Cited by4 opinions
- In re HofAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1984
- In re the Accounting of Public Administrator of King CountyNew York Surrogate's Court · 1956
- In re the Estate of HarrisNew York Surrogate's Court · 2008
- Bloch v. SchragenheimCivil Court of the City of New York · 1980