In re the Assignment of Rauth & Son
New York Court of Common Pleas
Application to confirm the report of a referee upon an accounting by an assignee under a general assignment for the benefit of creditors. The facts are stated in the opinion.
1Opinion of the CourtVan Hoesen, J.
I. In the case of Halsey v. Van Amringe (6 Paige, 12), the Chancellor did not deem it necessary to pass upon the question as to whether the Court of Chancery could disallow commissions where an executor or administrator had, fraudulently mismanaged the estate, but he did decide that commissions could not be disallowed by a surrogate, who is an officer of limited powers, and who, to use the language of the Chancellor, “takes no power by implication.” The duty of the surrogate is to obey the statute, which requires him to allow to executors and administrators specified commissions for their…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Meacham v. SternesNew York Court of Chancery · 1842
- Levy's AccountingNew York Court of Common Pleas · 1876
- Burtis v. DodgeNew York Court of Chancery · 1845
- Halsey v. Van AmringeNew York Court of Chancery · 1836
- Jewett v. WoodwardNew York Court of Chancery · 1831
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by11 opinions
- In re the Accounting of GinsburgNew York Supreme Court · 1899
- In re the Assignment of WolffNew York Court of Common Pleas · 1886
- In re the Accounting of FriendNew York Supreme Court · 1898
- In re the Final Accounting of BowlbyNew York Supreme Court · 1901
- In re the General Assignment for the Benefit of Creditors of Sound Spectrum of Nassau, Ltd., New York County Courts1986
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.