Riggs v. . Cragg
New York Court of Appeals
These are appeals from two judgments of the General Term of the Supreme Court, in the first judicial department, entered upon orders which affirmed decrees of the surrogate of the county of New York; one made upon settlement of the accounts of the executors of the will of Elisha Riggs, deceased; the other settling the accounts of the same persons as trustees under said will. (Reported below, 26 Hun, 90.) The material facts are stated in the opinion.
1Opinion of the Court
Andrews, Ch. J.
The objection that the surrogate had no jurisdiction to render the decrees in question is, we think, well taken.
The proceedings were instituted by the filing of a petition before the surrogate of the county of Hew York, on the 1th day of June, 1810, by Samuel W. Cragg, administrator of Mary Alice Cragg, deceased, setting forth that Mary Alice Cragg was the daughter of Elisha Biggs, deceased, late of the city of Hew York, and beneficially interested in the estate of said Elisha Biggs, and in a trust created by his will; that the testator died August 3, 1853, and that his will…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Bevan v. . CooperNew York Court of Appeals · 1878
- Wakeman v. GroverNew York Court of Chancery · 1832
- Ferrer v. . PyneNew York Court of Appeals · 1880
- Hallett & Davis v. HallettNew York Court of Chancery · 1829
- Sipperly v. . BaucusNew York Court of Appeals · 1861
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by70 opinions
- Purdy v. . HaytNew York Court of Appeals · 1883
- McLouth v. . HuntNew York Court of Appeals · 1897
- MTR. OF STORTECKY v. MazzoneNew York Court of Appeals · 1995
- Matter of Petition of CampNew York Court of Appeals · 1891
- In Re the Accounting of UnderhillNew York Court of Appeals · 1889
65 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.