Case v. Beloe

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Case v. Beloe

125 A.D. 906, 109 N.Y.S. 168

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

DecidedMarch 15, 1908

DocketNo. 2

StatusPublished

This text of 125 A.D. 906 (Case v. Beloe) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Case v. Beloe, 125 A.D. 906, 109 N.Y.S. 168 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1908).

Pincite

Opinion

Woodward, J.;

The plaintiff appears to be insolvent and a reversal of the judgment upon appeal would result in further depletion of the trust fund, while an acceptance of the condition of the withdrawal of the appeal will end the controversy between the plaintiff and the substituted trustee, and also remove possibility of an action by the plaintiff to recover from the appellant the excess amount paid to her testator. Originally the claim of the plaintiff’s attorneys was §7,500; by agreement this was reduced to §3,500. The referee allowed them §500 and found that §2,000 in addition would have been a proper credit, if paid. This §2,000 Mr. Justice Marean allowed, and the §1,000 in question here makes up the amount of $3,500. The order simply carries out the terms of the offer of settlement, which it appears was not improperly accepted. The order, in so far as appealed from, should be affirmed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements. Jenks, Hooker, Gaynor and Rich, JJ., concurred. Order affirmed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements.

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

Woodward, J.;

The plaintiff appears to be insolvent and a reversal of the judgment upon appeal would result in further depletion of the trust fund, while an acceptance of the condition of the withdrawal of the appeal will end the controversy between the plaintiff and the substituted trustee, and also remove possibility of an action by the plaintiff to recover from the appellant the excess amount paid to her testator. Originally the claim of the plaintiff’s attorneys was §7,500; by agreement this was reduced to §3,500. The referee allowed them §500 and found that §2,000 in addition would have been a proper credit, if paid. This §2,000 Mr. Justice Marean allowed, and the §1,000 in question here makes up the amount of $3,500. The order simply carries out the terms of the offer of settlement, which it appears was not improperly accepted. The order, in so far as appealed from, should be affirmed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements. Jenks, Hooker, Gaynor and Rich, JJ., concurred. Order affirmed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

125 A.D. 906, 109 N.Y.S. 168, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/case-v-beloe-nyappdiv-1908.