Legal Opinion

In re the Estate of O'Dowd

New York Surrogate's Court

Decided June 29, 1937PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Foley, S.

All the exceptions to the referee’s reports are overruled and his reports are in all respects confirmed.

*606I specifically hold that the executor of the deceased executrix was under no duty, under the circumstances disclosed, to apply for the appointment of himself or any one else as administrator c. t. a. of the estate of the testator, Martin O’Dowd. It is true that in the ordinary case, upon the death of an executor a representative to administer the assets of a testator remaining unadministered should be appointed. But where, as here, the deceased executrix, Mary O’Dowd, was the sole…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Blood v. . KaneNew York Court of Appeals · 1892
  2. In Re the Accounting of the Empire Trust Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1931
  3. In Re the Accounting of HiddenNew York Court of Appeals · 1926
  4. In re the Estate of RogersNew York Surrogate's Court · 1926
  5. In re Proving the Alleged Last Will & Testament of MarshallAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1919

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

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. In re the Estate of KeelerNew York Surrogate's Court · 1945
  2. In re the Estate of FloeschNew York Surrogate's Court · 1950
  3. Steinhardt v. SteinhardtNew York Supreme Court · 1948
  4. In re the Probate of the Will of KoelschNew York Surrogate's Court · 1943

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API