In re the Accounting of Barletta
New York Surrogate's Court
1Opinion of the Court
Maximilian Moss, S.
Incidental to the petition of the administrator for the judicial settlement of his account a determination is necessary with respect to the claim of objectant to proceeds of certain series E United States savings bonds and to the amount requested by the administrator’s attorney for legal services. The issue to he determined is whether the committee was vested with all the powers of his incompetent ward with respect to the disposition of certain United States savings bonds.
The agreed statement of facts submitted to this court by the parties is substantially as follows:…
2Cases cited19 opinions
- Flynn v. . McDermottNew York Court of Appeals · 1905
- In Re the Accounting of HicksNew York Court of Appeals · 1902
- Walter v. . WalterNew York Court of Appeals · 1916
- Katz v. DriscollCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1948
- Viets v. . Union National Bank of TroyNew York Court of Appeals · 1886
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by9 opinions
- Hoefflin v. HolcombeCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1959
- Levites v. LevitesAppellate Court of Illinois · 1960
- In Re Freedland EstateMichigan Court of Appeals · 1972
- Tindall v. ChappellMissouri Court of Appeals · 1988
- Armata v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1974
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.