Legal Opinion

In re the Estate of Putnam

New York Surrogate's Court

Decided February 2, 1940PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Opinion of the Court

Wingate, S.

This court does not deem a misunderstanding of pertinent New York law respecting the remuneration of fiduciaries by the Commissioner of Internal Revenue an adequate reason for & resettlement of the decree heretofore entered.

The Court of Appeals in McAlpine v. Potter (Matter of McAlpine) (126 N. Y. 285, 289) commented upon the situation which is present under the terms of this will, in the following language: “ To the ordinary duties of an executor may be added the performance of a trust in such a manner that the two functions run on together. It is the duty of an executor as such…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. In Re the Judicial Settlement of the Accounts McAlpineNew York Court of Appeals · 1891
  2. In re the Estate of GallowayNew York Surrogate's Court · 1931
  3. Ruland v. TuthillAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1919
  4. In re the Estate of BartlettNew York Surrogate's Court · 1937
  5. In re the Estate of WolanskiNew York Surrogate's Court · 1935

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. In re the Estate of ChisholmNew York Surrogate's Court · 1941

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

Powered by the Exa API