In re Aplington

New York Court of Common Pleas

In re Aplington

18 N.Y.S. 357

New York Court of Common Pleas·Decided April 4, 1892·Published

Opinion

Per Curiam.

The authority of the assignee to employ counsel on behalf of the assigned estate, and his right to be reimbursed for the reasonable counsel fees thus incurred, are not disputed; but the refusal of the court at special term to allow the sums asked by the assignee to be credited to him as proper items of disbursements proceeded upon other grounds, which are fully stated in the opinion of the learned chief judge. These grounds appear to us to be conclusive upon the propriety of the disposition of the matters embraced in the order appealed from, and it should therefore be affirmed. Order affirmed, with costs.

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

Per Curiam.

The authority of the assignee to employ counsel on behalf of the assigned estate, and his right to be reimbursed for the reasonable counsel fees thus incurred, are not disputed; but the refusal of the court at special term to allow the sums asked by the assignee to be credited to him as proper items of disbursements proceeded upon other grounds, which are fully stated in the opinion of the learned chief judge. These grounds appear to us to be conclusive upon the propriety of the disposition of the matters embraced in the order appealed from, and it should therefore be affirmed. Order affirmed, with costs.

In re Aplington, 18 N.Y.S. 357 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1892).

Pincite

18 N.Y.S. 357 (In re Aplington) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.