Legal Opinion

In re the Compulsory Accounting of Eisenberg

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

Decided February 4, 1952PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

An allegation in a petition, in a proceeding such as this, that the petitioner is a creditor of the estate, does not in and of itself suffice to establish the petitioner’s right to maintain the proceeding as a creditor. The status of a “ creditor ” is not the same as that of a “person interested in the estate.” (Cf. Surrogate’s Ct. Act, § 314, subds. 3, 10; see Matter of Leahy, 184 Misc. 250.) The learned Surrogate should have conducted a hearing and determined, upon evidence there adduced, whether the petitioner was a creditor prima facie. (Matter of Scheftel, 150 Misc. 3; see Matter of…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. In re the Estate of ScheftelNew York Surrogate's Court · 1933
  2. In re the Estate of AhrensAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1946
  3. In re the Estate of LeahyNew York Surrogate's Court · 1945

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. In re the Accounting of EngelbachNew York Surrogate's Court · 1957
  2. In re the Accounting of RubinNew York Surrogate's Court · 1960
  3. In re the Estate of PucNew York Surrogate's Court · 1962
  4. In re the Estate of ThomsNew York Surrogate's Court · 1973
  5. In re the Accounting of LukinNew York Surrogate's Court · 1959

1 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