Legal Opinion

In re the Estate of Grifenhagen

New York Surrogate's Court

Decided June 23, 1938PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Foley, S.

The questions raised in this accounting proceeding are disposed of as follows:(1) The claim of the executors and trustees that they are entitled to retain all present and future income, as well as installments of principal, which may be due or become due to Benjamin W. Grifenhagen under the terms of the will to the extent necessary to reimburse the estate for the amount of the indebtedness owing by him, is sustained. Benjamin W. Grifenhagen does not oppose the retention of such income and principal. It is opposed, however, by Ida M. Garfinkel, who claims as an assignee of his…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Earle v. . EarleNew York Court of Appeals · 1883
  2. In re the Estate of BurrNew York Surrogate's Court · 1932
  3. Belknap v. BelknapMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1862
  4. Emmet v. RunyonAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1910

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. In re the Estate of Van NostrandNew York Surrogate's Court · 1941
  2. In re the Estate of ProffenNew York Surrogate's Court · 1940
  3. In re the Estate of GrifenhagenNew York Surrogate's Court · 1940
  4. In re the Estate of KingNew York Surrogate's Court · 1940

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

Powered by the Exa API