In Re the Accounting of Hart

147 N.E. 174, 239 N.Y. 511, 1924 N.Y. LEXIS 520
New York Court of Appeals·Decided October 14, 1924·Published·Cited by 3 cases

Opinion

Per Curiam.

A party aggrieved may appeal in a case provided by law.” (Civil Practice Act, § 557.) The trustees under the will of the incompetent’s deceased husband had no legal interest sufficient to authorize an appeal from the order herein when those 'directly con *512 cerned in the determination of the question of the allowance and amount of counsel fee had been given notice of the filing of the account of the committee and of an application for the judicial settlement thereof. An incident to such application would be the allowance of counsel fees. (Matter of Maxwell, 218 N. Y. 88.)

Respondents were under no duty to protect the rights of the incompetent or the other beneficiaries under the will by taking an appeal from the order of the" Special Term to the Appellate Division. (Isham v. N. Y. Association for the Poor, 177 N. Y. 218, 222.)

The order should be reversed, with costs, and appeal from order of the Special Term to the Appellate Division dismissed, with costs.

Hiscock, Ch. J., Pound, McLaughlin, Crane and Andrews, JJ., concur; Cardozo and Lehman, JJ., dissent.

Order reversed, etc.

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

In Re the Accounting of Hart, 147 N.E. 174, 239 N.Y. 511, 1924 N.Y. LEXIS 520 (N.Y. 1924).

147 N.E. 174 (In Re the Accounting of Hart) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

In re Manufacturers & Traders Trust Co.
42 A.D.3d 936 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2007)
State Ex Rel. St. Louis Union Trust Co. v. Sartorius
164 S.W.2d 356 (Supreme Court of Missouri, 1942)
Musser's Estate
17 A.2d 411 (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 1940)