Metzger v. Metzger
New York Surrogate's Court
1Opinion of the Court
The Surrogate.
The practice in the Ecclesiastical Courts in the accounting of an executor or administrator, has always permitted the legatees or next of Mn to disprove or object to the account, although made upon oath. (4 Burn’s Ecc. L., p. 487, 488; Swinborne, 860.) The administrator is bound to make due proof of every payment. In England, where the sum is under 40 shillings, the payment is proved by his own oath, if there is no evidence of fraud by dividing greater sums into less, and the aggregate of all the sums does not exceed £100. (Robinson vs. Cum*266ming, 2 Atk., 410.) By our statute (2…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Gardner v. GardnerNew York Court of Chancery · 1838
- Williams v. PurdyNew York Court of Chancery · 1836
3Cited by8 opinions
- Fowler v. LockwoodNew York Surrogate's Court · 1877
- In re O'BrienNew York Surrogate's Court · 1893
- Strong v. StrongNew York Surrogate's Court · 1879
- In re WhiteNew York Surrogate's Court · 1888
- Bainbridge v. McCulloughNew York Supreme Court · 1874
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.