In re McGrath

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re McGrath

234 A.D. 891

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided December 15, 1931·Published

Opinion

Decree of the Surrogate’s Court of Westchester county modified by ehminating the allowance granted to the petitioner and as so modified affirmed, without costs. We are of opinion that while the court had the power to make the allowance under the amendment to section 278 of the Surrogate’s Court Act, it was not justified in this ease for the reasons, first, that the petitioner was not successful, and, second, that the services rendered were not beneficial to the estate. Hagarty, Carswell and Seudder, JJ., concur; Lazansky, P. J., and Davis, J., dissent and vote to affirm without modification. [140 Misc. 245.]

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

Decree of the Surrogate’s Court of Westchester county modified by ehminating the allowance granted to the petitioner and as so modified affirmed, without costs. We are of opinion that while the court had the power to make the allowance under the amendment to section 278 of the Surrogate’s Court Act, it was not justified in this ease for the reasons, first, that the petitioner was not successful, and, second, that the services rendered were not beneficial to the estate. Hagarty, Carswell and Seudder, JJ., concur; Lazansky, P. J., and Davis, J., dissent and vote to affirm without modification. [140 Misc. 245.]

In re McGrath, 234 A.D. 891 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1931).

Pincite

234 A.D. 891 (In re McGrath) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related