Legal Opinion

In re the Accounting of Keck

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

Decided January 16, 1952PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Memorandum: We believe that the Surrogate was in error in disallowing, as a charge against the estate, the claim of appellants’ trial counsel for his services rendered in successfully defending the attack upon the will. It was not only the right of these executors, but their duty, to use all reasonable care and diligence to sustain the will and “ To prevent the intention of a testator from being frustrated”. (Matter of Dutcher, 251 App. Div. 184, 186.) While the record indicates that the trial counsel, although employed by the executors, was also attorney for them individually as legatees…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. In Re the Accounting of OrdwayNew York Court of Appeals · 1909
  2. In re the Estate of Van VolkenburghNew York Surrogate's Court · 1931
  3. In re the Judicial Settlement of the Account of Proceedings of SmithAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1937

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Hursh v. TheisSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1956
  2. In re the Estate of KaufmannNew York Surrogate's Court · 1966
  3. In re the Estate of MannAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1973
  4. In Re Estate of HealySupreme Court of Minnesota · 1956
  5. In re the Estate of DiJuricoNew York Surrogate's Court · 1987

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

Powered by the Exa API