Hoyt v. Bonnett
New York Supreme Court
THIS is an appeal from a decree of the surrogate of the county of Hew York, settling the accounts of executors and ordering payment of legacies. The question presented by the case was whether the claims made by the appellants were barred by the statute, by reason of the omission of the claimants to commence suit thereon within six months after the time when the same were rejected by the executors, or after they became due.
Read the full summary
THIS is an appeal from a decree of the surrogate of the county of Hew York, settling the accounts of executors and ordering payment of legacies. The question presented by the case was whether the claims made by the appellants were barred by the statute, by reason of the omission of the claimants to commence suit thereon within six months after the time when the same were rejected by the executors, or after they became due. Augustus Whitlock, of the city of Hew York, died prior to September 20, 1866, leaving a last will and testament, which was duly admitted .to probate, and on the last…
1Opinion of the Court
By the Court, Cardozo, J.
The appellants, in their proceeding to review the action of the surrogate, have themselves characterized their claim against the estate as a debt due and owing. It is most likely that they were right in so regarding it, though it is not consistent with the ground upon which they ask us to reverse the surrogate’s decision. But I do not think it necessary to determine that point. The statute does not limit the claims *544to be presented to the executors, to such as are due. Whether due or not, if there is an intention to make a claim against the estate, notice of that claim…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Barsalou's CaseNew York Surrogate's Court · 1857
- Murray v. SmithThe Superior Court of New York City · 1863
3Cited by3 opinions
- Douglass v. FolsomNevada Supreme Court · 1893
- Cavin v. City of BrooklynNew York Court of Appeals · 1890
- Prentice v. WhitneyNew York Supreme Court · 1876