Legal Opinion
Hopper v. Hopper
New York Supreme Court
Decided January 7, 1889PublishedCited by 2 opinions
Action by Oliver T. Hopper against Mary 0. Hopper, who, as foreign executrix, has taken out letters ancillary in New York.
1Opinion of the Court
Barrett, J
It is conceded that an action at law will not lie in the courts of this state against a foreign executor. The plaintiff, however, contends that such an action will lie against a foreign executor who has taken out ancillary letters here. Ho authority is furnished in support of this contention, and it is contrary to the general doctrine upon the subject. Where a foreign executor has reduced assets of the decedent within our jurisdiction to his possession, he will be compelled to account therefor in equity; and, where he liassecured such assets by virtue of his ancillary letters, he…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- McNamara v. DwyerNew York Court of Chancery · 1838
- Brown v. BrownNew York Court of Chancery · 1845
- Field v. GibsonNew York Supreme Court · 1878
3Cited by2 opinions
- In re Ancillary Letters of Administration With the Will Annexed of McShaneNew York Surrogate's Court · 1911
- Montgomery v. BoydAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1903