In Re the Accounting of Sherman
New York Court of Appeals
Appeal from an order of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the third judicial department, entered May 8, 1916, which affirmed a decree of the Saratoga' County Surrogate’s Court, settling and surcharging the accounts of the temporary administrator of the estate of William S. Deyo, deceased. The facts, so far as material, are stated in the opinion.
Read the full summary
Appeal from an order of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the third judicial department, entered May 8, 1916, which affirmed a decree of the Saratoga' County Surrogate’s Court, settling and surcharging the accounts of the temporary administrator of the estate of William S. Deyo, deceased. The facts, so far as material, are stated in the opinion. Sherman’s evidence being given, there being nothing inherently improbable about it, and it being wholly uncontradicted and believed by the surrogate, who has expressly found that he told the truth, the surrogate was in error in holding…
1DissentMcLaughlin, J.
The prevailing opinion' proceeds upon the theory that the decree of the Surrogate’s Court cannot be sustained because based upon “ insufficient and improper findings.” I have been unable to reach such conclusion. In my opinion the findings are not necessarily insufficient or improper when they are considered in the light of the evidence upon which they are based.
Notwithstanding the unanimous affirmance, if a finding be ambiguous or not clear, then we may look into the evidence for the purpose of ascertaining its true meaning or removing what is an apparent ambiguity.
The tenth finding is: “…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- In Re the Probate of the Will of HopkinsNew York Court of Appeals · 1903