Legal Opinion

In re the Estate of Kadar

New York Surrogate's Court

Decided April 6, 1956PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

William T. Collins, S.

The petitioner in this discovery proceeding made demand upon respondent George Eado for a bill of particulars covering 42 items. The respondent does not object to 15 items. He moves to vacate 27 items of the demand on the ground that they are improper, immaterial or irrelevant, or require him to divulge evidentiary matters.

The amended petition charges the respondent with receiving from the decedent two checks aggregating $36,111.10, mingling the proceeds with his own property, converting the moneys to his own use, and failing to return the money to the decedent or…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Harmon v. Alfred Peats Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1926
  2. Matthews v. . HubbardNew York Court of Appeals · 1872
  3. Cunard v. . FrancklynNew York Court of Appeals · 1888
  4. Townsend v. HalbertNew York Supreme Court · 1944
  5. O'Keefe v. Young & Rubicam, Inc.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1939

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

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Rakov v. GingoldNew York Supreme Court · 1959
  2. In re the Estate of BoyhanNew York Surrogate's Court · 1960
  3. In re the Estate of ReynoldsNew York Surrogate's Court · 1971

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

Powered by the Exa API