In re Pye
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
Appeal by Erastus Van Houten from an order of the Surrogate?s Court of Rockland county,' entered in said Surrogate’s Court on the 28th day of June, 1897, denying his motion to vacate an order of said Surrogate’s Court made on the 3d day of February, 1897, punishing him for contempt of court.
Read the full summary
Appeal by Erastus Van Houten from an order of the Surrogate?s Court of Rockland county,' entered in said Surrogate’s Court on the 28th day of June, 1897, denying his motion to vacate an order of said Surrogate’s Court made on the 3d day of February, 1897, punishing him for contempt of court. On the 18th day of January, 1897, an amended final order and decree was made in the above-entitled proceeding, removing Erastus Van Houten, as executor, and enjoining him from in any way exercising control over or interfering with any property which belonged to the estate of Edward Gr. Van Houten,…
1Per curiam
This court can review the discretionary power of the Surrogate’s Court so far only as authorized by statute. The provisions of section 2481 of the Code of Civil Procedure do not provide for a review, as if it were an original application in this court, of the determination of the surrogate in such a case as the present. (Matter of Tilden, 98 N. Y. 434; Matter of Hawley 100 id. 206; Matter of Hodgman, 82 Hun, 419.) There does not appear to have been any abuse of.discretion by the Surrogate’s Court in the denial of the motion. The power is with that court, and reference will be had to the order…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- In Re the Several Accountings of the Executors of TildenNew York Court of Appeals · 1885
- In re Hodgman's EstateNew York Supreme Court · 1894