Hall v. Strong

117 A.D. 912, 102 N.Y.S. 161
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided January 15, 1907·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

Per Curiam:

The court will not upon this motion, determine the sufficiency of this answer. For will.it determine the rights of the defendants as remaindermen under the will of Eleanor M. Strong. The action seeks an accounting from the defendants for trust funds held by their testator. Such trust funds as may be found would naturally be directed paid to the surviving trustee. The defendants, however, by answer, complain that the surviving trustee is not competent to take Charge of said trust funds and that by reason of their interest as remaindermen they ask his removal. If the allegation in defendants’ answer be true, and if defendants have an interest as remaindermen in this trust fund they would seem to show good grounds why any sum which they shall be decreed to pay shall not be paid to this surviving trustee, and it is difficult to see why the court should not in this action investigate as to whom these moneys should be paid. Assuming, then, that the issue as to the competency of this surviving trustee' is a material issue, the allegations of the answer' are not irrelevant, and if relevant, the fact that those allegations reflect upon character is no ground for expunging them from the record. The order should be affirmed, with ten dollars costs.' All concurred; Parker, P. J., not sitting. Order affirmed, with ten dollars costs ‘and disbursements.

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

Hall v. Strong, 117 A.D. 912, 102 N.Y.S. 161 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1907).

117 A.D. 912 (Hall v. Strong) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Hall v. Strong
113 N.Y.S. 1133 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1908)