Karvonen v. Halmetoja
Massachusetts Appeals Court
1Opinion of the Court
Counsel for the three persons who unsuccessfully opposed the petition for the allowance of the will were not entitled to payment of their fees and expenses from the estate generally under either § 39A or § 45 of G. L. c. 215, because their services were not rendered in the administration of the estate nor for the estate or its representative, nor did their services confer a benefit on the estate. See Mulloney v. Barnes, 266 Mass. 50, 54 (1929); Conley v. Fenelon, 266 Mass. 340, 343-345 (1929); Collis v. Walker, 272 Mass. 46, 49 (1930); Potter v. Mullaney, 301 Mass. 497, 500 (1938); Miller v.…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- Conley v. FenelonMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1929
- Perry v. PerryMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1959
- Miller v. SternMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1950
- Greene v. CroninMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1943
- Mulloney v. BarnesMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1929
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- Dolan v. SeveranceMassachusetts Appeals Court · 1981
- Karvonen v. LererMassachusetts Appeals Court · 1980