Argus v. Kokkorou

Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court

Argus v. Kokkorou

45 N.E.2d 399, 312 Mass. 697, 1942 Mass. LEXIS 871

CourtMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court

DecidedOctober 8, 1942

StatusPublished

This text of 45 N.E.2d 399 (Argus v. Kokkorou) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Argus v. Kokkorou, 45 N.E.2d 399, 312 Mass. 697, 1942 Mass. LEXIS 871 (Mass. 1942).

Pincite

Opinion

Decree affirmed. This is an appeal by the widow of Andritsos A. Corcorou, late of Lynn, from a decree of the Probate Court allowing the second and final account of the administrator of the estate of the deceased. The only objection made to the account as allowed by the decree is to a payment of $350 by the administrator for attorney’s fees for services rendered to him. The evidence is reported. And there is a report of the material facts found by the judge. That report contains a finding, not inconsistent with other findings, that “a great part of the services performed” by the attorney “were beneficial to the estate, and that a reasonable charge therefor is $350.” This finding was not plainly wrong on the evidence reported. No useful purpose will be served by stating or discussing the evidence. Reed v. Reed, 114 Mass. 372, 373. Ecklund v. Ecklund, 288 Mass. 517, 518. This finding- supports the decree which must be affirmed.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Decree affirmed. This is an appeal by the widow of Andritsos A. Corcorou, late of Lynn, from a decree of the Probate Court allowing the second and final account of the administrator of the estate of the deceased. The only objection made to the account as allowed by the decree is to a payment of $350 by the administrator for attorney’s fees for services rendered to him. The evidence is reported. And there is a report of the material facts found by the judge. That report contains a finding, not inconsistent with other findings, that “a great part of the services performed” by the attorney “were beneficial to the estate, and that a reasonable charge therefor is $350.” This finding was not plainly wrong on the evidence reported. No useful purpose will be served by stating or discussing the evidence. Reed v. Reed, 114 Mass. 372, 373. Ecklund v. Ecklund, 288 Mass. 517, 518. This finding- supports the decree which must be affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

45 N.E.2d 399, 312 Mass. 697, 1942 Mass. LEXIS 871, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/argus-v-kokkorou-mass-1942.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack