Legal Opinion

In re the Estate of Lent

New York Surrogate's Court

Decided May 9, 1936PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Wingate, S.

This is an application to punish the respondent by incarceration for failure to obey a decretal direction in a discovery proceeding to pay certain sums with which he was found chargeable. An interesting contention is made on his behalf that, since he was not in the fiduciary class enumerated in section 79 of the Surrogate’s Court Act, the decree itself is not evidence of his possession of assets sufficient to enable him to comply with the direction, and that, therefore, contumaciousness may not be imputed f *412to him in the absence of an affirmative demonstration of ability to comply…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Schmohl v. PhillipsAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1910
  2. In re the Estate of CookeNew York Surrogate's Court · 1933
  3. In re the Estate of GarrityNew York Surrogate's Court · 1933
  4. In re the Judicial Settlement of the Account of ScheuerAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1914

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. In re HildrethAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1967
  2. In re ChassmanNew York Supreme Court · 1955
  3. In re the Estate of ShereNew York Surrogate's Court · 1937

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

Powered by the Exa API