Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

Lare Estate

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Decided October 9, 1969No. Appeal, 75Published

1Concurring in part, dissenting in part

Concurring and Dissenting Opinion by

Mr. Justice Roberts:

I fully agree with the majority’s decision to hold this professional corporate fiduciary liable for breaching its fiduciary duties. I must, however, dissent from the limitation which the majority places on the extent of the bank’s liability. I cannot agree that principles of res judicata bar surcharge for the period of 1944 *16to 1949. Nor can I agree that the rate of surcharge must be fixed at six percent per annum.

I start with two settled propositions. An account of a fiduciary, confirmed by the court, is only conclusive as to what it…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Alpern v. Girard Trust Corn Exchange BankSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1961
  2. Lare EstateSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1951
  3. Shindel's AppealSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1868
  4. McLellan's AppealSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1874
  5. Estate of John VogleSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1929

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

Powered by the Exa API