Legal Opinion

Leask v. Hoagland

New York Supreme Court

Decided July 15, 1909PublishedCited by 25 opinions

Action for an accounting.

1Opinion of the CourtBischoff, J.

Their accounting in the Surrogate’s Court having been arrested for want of that tribunal’s jurisdiction *158to pronounce upon the merits of the questions, the executors of Hudson Hoagland, deceased, have brought this action to determine, firstly, the fact -as well as the amount of Charles F. Hoagland’s indebtedness to the testator; secondly, the time up to which interest should be charged against him upon his indebtedness; thirdly, the executors’ right to offset the indebtedness against the debtor’s share as a residuary legatee; fourthly, the claim of Harry David Kerr, as assignee of Thomas E.…

2Cases cited23 opinions

  1. Trustees v. GreenoughSupreme Court of the United States · 1882
  2. Scott v. ArmstrongSupreme Court of the United States · 1892
  3. Williams v. . IngersollNew York Court of Appeals · 1882
  4. Mockowik v. Kansas CitySupreme Court of Missouri · 1906
  5. Delaware County Commissioners v. Diebold Safe & Lock Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1890

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

3Cited by25 opinions

  1. In re MeekerNew York Surrogate's Court · 1929
  2. In Re Estate of LindmeyerSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1931
  3. In Re ColemanCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1937
  4. Hoxsey v. HoffpauirCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1950
  5. Renfro v. NixonIdaho Supreme Court · 1935

20 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