Matter of Application, Etc., of MacAulay
New York Court of Appeals
Appeal from order of the General Term of the Supreme Court in the second judicial department, made September 11, 1882, which affirmed an order of the surrogate of the county of Dutchess.
Read the full summary
Appeal from order of the General Term of the Supreme Court in the second judicial department, made September 11, 1882, which affirmed an order of the surrogate of the county of Dutchess. (Reported below, 27 Hun, 577.) Letitia A. Jones presented a petition to said surrogate, stating in substance that Emma Louisa Van Allen was a legatee under the will of Isaac 0. Van Wyck, deceased ; that said Emma is dead and the legacy has been duly assigned by her heirs at law and next of kin to the petitioner who has also been duly appointed administratrix of her estate; that more than eighteen months have…
1Opinion of the CourtDanforth, J.
It is not denied that the surrogate had jurisdiction over the subject matter, nor that the citation, if properly served was sufficient to require the executor of the will of Isaac Van Wyck, to show cause why he should not file an inventory of the estatej and render and settle his accounts, and pay the legacy bequeathed by the testator to Emma Louisa Van Allen. Whether it was properly issued and served, and jurisdiction acquired over the executor, and if so whether upon his answer the surrogate erred in refusing to dismiss the proceeding, are the questions raised by this appeal.
First. The…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Thomson v. . TaylorNew York Court of Appeals · 1877
3Cited by20 opinions
- Henderson v. HendersonNew York Court of Appeals · 1928
- Lambert v. . CraftNew York Court of Appeals · 1885
- Matson v. AbbeyNew York Supreme Court · 1893
- Grant v. Kellogg Co.District Court, S.D. New York · 1943
- In re Riley's EstateNew York Surrogate's Court · 1893
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.