Leddel's v. Starr
New Jersey Court of Chancery
On argument of order to show cause why the complainant should not be removed or suspended from the exercise of his office as executor, and a receiver be appointed. The papers show that all the original inventory has been converted into, money, except one small bond and mortgage of Elias Bishop and wife, for $525, and except the Starr bond of $6240; and the main question in the principal cas© is, whether that is paid by the assets of Mrs. Leddel.
Read the full summary
On argument of order to show cause why the complainant should not be removed or suspended from the exercise of his office as executor, and a receiver be appointed. The papers show that all the original inventory has been converted into, money, except one small bond and mortgage of Elias Bishop and wife, for $525, and except the Starr bond of $6240; and the main question in the principal cas© is, whether that is paid by the assets of Mrs. Leddel. Those assets complainant brings into court, and asks the court to, settle the title to. them. If adjudicated to, belong to the estate, they will…
1Opinion of the Court
The Chancellor.
The bill in this case was filed by the complainant for the settlement of the estate of his testator, and for directions as to the disposition of certain funds or securities in his hands, claimed to belong to the estate of Jemima Leddol, the widow of the testator, whose administrator was made a party.
This application is made by the defendants, Jonas Denton and Frances his wife, on behalf of Frances Denton, a daughter of the testator, and legatee under the will. It is for two objects: the removal of the executor, and the appointment of a receiver.
This court has no power to remove…
2Cited by3 opinions
- In Re Accounting of Executors of KoretzkySupreme Court of New Jersey · 1951
- York Motel Associates v. BlumNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1962
- Warker v. WarkerNew Jersey Court of Chancery · 1928