In re the Accounting of Feit

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re the Accounting of Feit

278 A.D. 944, 104 N.Y.S.2d 857, 1951 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5319

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

DecidedJune 4, 1951

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 278 A.D. 944 (In re the Accounting of Feit) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

In re the Accounting of Feit, 278 A.D. 944, 104 N.Y.S.2d 857, 1951 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5319 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1951).

Pincite

Opinion

Order of the Surrogate’s Court of Nassau County insofar as appealed from, disallowing the claim of Harry L. Jacobs to the extent of $1,000 against the estate of the decedent unanimously affirmed, without costs. In taking the proof in respect of these claims, resort was had to subdivision 9 of section 32 of the Surrogate’s Court Act. The taking of such proof before a person designated as prescribed therein, in the exercise of discretion) should be confined to situations where there is no contested issue of fact or where section 347 of the Civil Practice Act is validly waived. It should not be used where there is a contested issue of fact, the resolving of which is dependent upon the credibility of witnesses or the admissibility or inadmissibility of testimony under section 347 of the Civil Practice Act. Present — Nolan, P. J., Carswell, Adel, Sneed and MacCrate, JJ. [See post, p. 972.]

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

Order of the Surrogate’s Court of Nassau County insofar as appealed from, disallowing the claim of Harry L. Jacobs to the extent of $1,000 against the estate of the decedent unanimously affirmed, without costs. In taking the proof in respect of these claims, resort was had to subdivision 9 of section 32 of the Surrogate’s Court Act. The taking of such proof before a person designated as prescribed therein, in the exercise of discretion) should be confined to situations where there is no contested issue of fact or where section 347 of the Civil Practice Act is validly waived. It should not be used where there is a contested issue of fact, the resolving of which is dependent upon the credibility of witnesses or the admissibility or inadmissibility of testimony under section 347 of the Civil Practice Act. Present — Nolan, P. J., Carswell, Adel, Sneed and MacCrate, JJ. [See post, p. 972.]

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

278 A.D. 944, 104 N.Y.S.2d 857, 1951 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5319, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-the-accounting-of-feit-nyappdiv-1951.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack