Legal Opinion
In re the Estate of Cannariato
New York Surrogate's Court
Decided May 9, 1936PublishedCited by 7 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Wingate, S.
So far as the memoranda of counsel or the independent research of the court have been able to disclose, the present application is wholly unprecedented. In it the attorney for a contestant on the probate of a will who succeeded in defeating its admission, applies for an allowance for his services under section 231-a of the Surrogate’s Court Act, payable from the general assets of the estate.
Whereas authority has been conferred on the surrogate by the wording of the enactment to “ direct payment * * * from the estate generally,” this purely discretionary power (Matter of Hirsch, 154…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- In re the Estate of WeissmannNew York Surrogate's Court · 1930
- In re the Judicial Settlement of the Estate of LounsberryAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1929
- In re the Estate of HirschNew York Surrogate's Court · 1935
- In re the Estate of RosenbergAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1934
- In re the Estate of RosenbergNew York Surrogate's Court · 1933
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by7 opinions
- In re the Estate of WinburnNew York Surrogate's Court · 1936
- In re BaxterAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1994
- Sussman v. United StatesDistrict Court, E.D. New York · 1962
- In re the Accounting of CoyneAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1945
- In re the Probate of the Will of LockeAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1964
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.