In re the Estate of Kaufman
New York Surrogate's Court
1Opinion of the Court
Delehanty, S.
There is no contradiction of the direct testimony that Harry Kaufman specifically assented to the manner of investment of the fund provided by deceased for him. No matter how inadvisable the investment may have been, there is no one here entitled to complain of it, since the objecting creditors and assignees can hold no better status than their assignor or debtor, who makes no criticism of the transactions and who has not been called by any party to testify. The attempted surcharge of the trustees must fail, therefore.
Section 32 of the Personal Property Law governs the priority…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Walker v. CramAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1913
- People ex rel. Duvall v. CocksAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1914
- First National Bank v. LovellNew York Supreme Court · 1931
- Ward v. BakerAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1919
3Cited by4 opinions
- In re the Estate of LainezNew York Surrogate's Court · 1979
- Moore v. City of YonkersAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1935
- In re the Accounting of GurneeNew York Surrogate's Court · 1956
- Moore v. City of YonkersAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1935