Legal Opinion

In re the Estate of Cromwell

New York Surrogate's Court

Decided June 5, 1933Published

1Opinion of the Court

Delehanty, S.

On this application, a substitution of attorneys and the turnover of papers have already been granted and new counsel has for some months been in full charge of the proceedings in behalf of the administrator. The remaining questions under consideration are an application to require a refund by the former counsel of a portion of the fees heretofore paid him, and a further application to require such counsel to turn over the specific sum of $515.50 collected by him as the proceeds of a check alleged to be part of the assets of the estate. This court has undoubted power to supervise…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Matter of Bailey v. RutherfordNew York Court of Appeals · 1926
  2. In re the Estate of BalazsNew York Surrogate's Court · 1933

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

Powered by the Exa API