Legal Opinion

Peltz v. Schultes

New York Supreme Court

Decided September 29, 1892Published

Motion by defendants (appellants) to modify a decree after an affirmance by the general term. 19 2í. Y. Supp. 637. Denied.

1Per curiam

At the last term of this court we affirmed the decision of the surrogate in the above-entitled matter, and awarded the costs and expenses of the appeal against the defendants personally. 19 N. Y. Supp. 637. The defendants now apply to this court to have the decree against them so modified as to relieve them from any personal liability for such costs and expenses. They allege in their petition for such relief that when they were asked to account for any property belonging to the estate of Isaac H. Watson that had come into their hands as the executors of Mary Watson they consulted counsel, and…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Peltz v. SchultesNew York Supreme Court · 1892

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

Powered by the Exa API