Hood v. Hayward
New York Supreme Court
Appeal from special term, Westchester county; Dykman, Justice. Code Civil Proc. IsT. Y. § 2603, provides that a decree revoking letters of an executor may, in the surrogate’s discretion, require such executor to account for all money received by him, and to deliver over all money in his hands into the surrogate’s court, or to his successor in office.
Read the full summary
Appeal from special term, Westchester county; Dykman, Justice. Code Civil Proc. IsT. Y. § 2603, provides that a decree revoking letters of an executor may, in the surrogate’s discretion, require such executor to account for all money received by him, and to deliver over all money in his hands into the surrogate’s court, or to his successor in office. Section 2606 provides that, when an executor dies, the surrogate’s court has the same jurisdiction, on petition of his successor, or of a surviving executor, to compel the personal representative of the decedent to account which it would have, as…
1Opinion of the CourtPratt, J.
There are cross-appeals in this ease. The action was on a joint and several bond given April 28,1864, by Frederick Hood, deceased, as principal, with David Moffat and defendant John FT. Hayward, as sureties, to the people, etc., in the penalty of $20,000, conditioned that it should be void if Hood should “faithfully execute the trust reposed in him as such executor, and also obey all orders of the surrogate of the county of Westchester touching the administration of the estate committed to him.” The will made Frederick, one of testator’s sons, and Maria, his widow, executors. The letters to…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- White v. . MillerNew York Court of Appeals · 1879
- Haight v. . BrisbinNew York Court of Appeals · 1885
- In Re the Estate of HoodNew York Court of Appeals · 1887
- Irvine v. . MillbankNew York Court of Appeals · 1874
3Cited by2 opinions
- Harbeck v. PupinNew York Supreme Court · 1890
- Potter v. OgdenNew York Supreme Court · 1892