In re Hilliard's Estate

160 N.Y.S. 514
CourtNew York Surrogate's Court
DecidedJune 1, 1916
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 160 N.Y.S. 514 (In re Hilliard's Estate) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New York Surrogate's Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
In re Hilliard's Estate, 160 N.Y.S. 514 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1916).

Opinion

FOWLER, S.

The surrogate has authority to construe a will in an accounting proceeding only when it is necessary to make such determination. Section 2510, C. C. P.; Garlock v. Vandervort, 128 N. Y, 374, 28 N. E. 599. The rule is well stated in Washbon v. Cope, 144 N. Y. at page 295, 39 N. E. at page 390, where it is said:

“As a general rule, the surrogate has no jurisdiction to construe the provisions of a will, except ini so far as it is necessary for him so to do in order that he may properly perform some other duty’’ (citing Mellen v. Mellen, 139 N. Y. 210, 34 N. E. 925).

In Re Davis, 105 App. Div. 226, 93 N. Y. Supp. 1004, the court is explicit on the same point. This application does not fall under the new sections creating a court of construction in this tribunal. There seems to be no present necessity for any construction, and therefore it ought not to be undertaken. See Peckham, J., Horton v. Cantwell, 108 N. Y. 269, 15 N. E. 546.

The application for construction must therefore be denied at this time, without prejudice. The accounting decree may be settled on the usual notice.

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

Related

In re Smith
17 Mills Surr. 282 (New York Surrogate's Court, 1916)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
160 N.Y.S. 514, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-hilliards-estate-nysurct-1916.