Legal Opinion

In re the Estate of Gibson

New York Surrogate's Court

Decided October 16, 1957PublishedCited by 9 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Joseph A. Cox, S.

Allowances have been requested by counsel under section 278 of the Surrogate’s Court Act. Payment of such compensation from the general estate is justified because the clarification of the will is beneficial to the entire estate. (Matter of Ablett, 3 N Y 2d 261, 279; Matter of James, 2 Misc 2d 468, 470.) Such allowances may be made for services rendered on the construction of the will; they may not be made for other services rendered to the client. (Matter of del Drago, 178 Misc. 325, affd. 264 App. Div. 718, affd. 289 N. Y. 601.) In fixing the amount of the compensation, the…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. In re the Accounting of Bankers Trust Co.New York Surrogate's Court · 1953
  2. In re the Construction of the Will of JamesNew York Surrogate's Court · 1955
  3. In Re the Accounting of Del DragoNew York Court of Appeals · 1942
  4. In re the Estate of del DragoNew York Surrogate's Court · 1942

3Cited by9 opinions

  1. In re the Construction of the Will of DickinsonNew York Surrogate's Court · 1957
  2. In re the Construction of the Will of GriffingNew York Surrogate's Court · 1961
  3. In re the Estate of HellerNew York Surrogate's Court · 1962
  4. In re the Estate of ThallNew York Surrogate's Court · 1964
  5. In re the Estate of StormNew York Surrogate's Court · 1962

4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API