In re Kaufman

New York Supreme Court

In re Kaufman

14 N.Y.S. 901, 39 N.Y. St. Rep. 236, 1891 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 2552

New York Supreme Court·Decided June 12, 1891·Published

Opinion

Per Curiam.

At the present term of the court we had occasion to consider the question of the necessity of a surrogate making findings of fact in probate cases, (In re Peck, 14 N. Y. Supp. 899,) and it was decided that the provisions of section 2545 of the Code were mandatory, and could not be disregarded. In the present proceeding it appears from the record that the surrogate was expressly asked to make findings of fact, which he refused to do, making a record of his refusal, to which a formal exception was taken; and under the ruling we have made, above cited, (In re Peck,) it is clear the refusal of the surrogate to make any findings was erroneous, and therefore the decree must be reversed.

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

Per Curiam.

At the present term of the court we had occasion to consider the question of the necessity of a surrogate making findings of fact in probate cases, (In re Peck, 14 N. Y. Supp. 899,) and it was decided that the provisions of section 2545 of the Code were mandatory, and could not be disregarded. In the present proceeding it appears from the record that the surrogate was expressly asked to make findings of fact, which he refused to do, making a record of his refusal, to which a formal exception was taken; and under the ruling we have made, above cited, (In re Peck,) it is clear the refusal of the surrogate to make any findings was erroneous, and therefore the decree must be reversed.

In re Kaufman, 14 N.Y.S. 901, 39 N.Y. St. Rep. 236, 1891 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 2552 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1891).

Pincite

14 N.Y.S. 901 (In re Kaufman) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related