Legal Opinion

In re the Judicial Settlement of the Account of Du Flon

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

Decided February 18, 1931Published

1Dissent

The claimant, I believe, is entitled to compensation for her long years of service. An express obligation to pay is indicated by the evidence, and an implied promise is apparent from the facts. (Moore v. Moore, 3 Abb. Ct. App. Dec. 303, 312; Gillan v. O’Leary, 124 App. Div. 498, 501.) Claimant was a stranger, not seeking a home, and the decedent needed a housekeeper, and had no thought of extending the charity of his roof. The surrogate was not justified in not taking into consideration the evidence of service performed and its value. (Hull v. Littauer, 162 N. Y. 569, 572; McKeon v. Van…

Also in this document: Concurrence.

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Hull v. . LittauerNew York Court of Appeals · 1900
  2. Moore v. MooreNew York Court of Appeals · 1860
  3. In re the Estate of McGillicuddyAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1920
  4. In re the Judicial Settlement of the Accounts of ClarkAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1923
  5. Gillan v. O'LearyAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1908

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

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

Powered by the Exa API