In re the Judicial Settlement of the Account of Van Denburgh
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
Appeal by Maude Van Denburgh, as administratrix with the will annexed, from a decree of the Surrogate’s Court of the county of Saratoga, entered in the office of said Surrogate’s Court on the 5th day of October, 1916, allowing the claim of respondent against the estate.
1Opinion of the Court
Kellogg, P. J.:
The respondent, undertaker, claims compensation for the burial of the daughter of the intestate, who was at the time of her death over twenty-one years of age, an incompetent person and without property. The mother was living apart from the father, and the daughter was living with the mother. Upon the daughter’s death, the mother telephoned the father that the daughter had just died. He asked what undertaker she was to have, and she inquired who he wanted and he said to get the claimant. She replied that she would carry out his wishes and he told her he would see the bill paid.…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Cromwell v. BenjaminNew York Supreme Court · 1863
- Alger v. MillerNew York Supreme Court · 1868
3Cited by3 opinions
- Borchert v. BorchertCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1946
- Kruvant v. KruvantNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1968
- Baldwin, State Treasurer v. RobyWyoming Supreme Court · 1939