In re Ries

170 A.D. 951, 155 N.Y.S. 1136, 1915 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5775
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in In re Ries. Read the opinion of the Court — 182 A.D. 296

Opinion

The surrogate’s right and duty to bring in an interested party who has not been named in the original citation is in furtherance of equity. (Matter of Ibert, 48 App. Div. 510.) No ground is disclosed to review or modify this exercise of the surrogate’s powers. The petition was also in proper form. Where the applicants reside out of the county, and the matters are peculiarly within the attorney’s knowledge, the attorney may properly verify such a petition. (Moorhouse v. Hutchinson, 2 Dem. 429.) The surrogate’s order permitting an amendment and the issue of a supplemental citation to bring in the mortgagee was, therefore, right. Order of the Surrogate’s Court of Queens county affirmed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements. Jenks, P. J., Carr, Stapleton, Mills and Putnam, JJ., concurred.

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

In re Ries, 170 A.D. 951, 155 N.Y.S. 1136, 1915 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5775 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1915).

170 A.D. 951 (In re Ries) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

In re Ibert
48 A.D. 510 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1900)