In re the Accounting of Moran

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re the Accounting of Moran

23 A.D.2d 623, 1965 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4796

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

DecidedFebruary 25, 1965

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 23 A.D.2d 623 (In re the Accounting of Moran) 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 Moran, 23 A.D.2d 623, 1965 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4796 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1965).

Pincite

Opinion

Order unanimously affirmed, with costs to respondents payable out of the estate. Appellant’s reply brief is stricken and expunged from the records of this court. Memorandum: Whether the issue as decided was one of law or fact, we agree that the conclusion reached by the Surrogate was correct. Appellant’s reply brief is permeated with accusations and criticisms directed against respondents’ counsel and the Surrogate which we deem to be wholly unjustifiable. It should, therefore, be expunged from the records of this court. (Scholing v. O’Connor, 209 App. Div. 839; Baylis v. Wood, 246 App. Div. 779.) (Appeal by administrator from an order of Niagara Surro[624]*624gate’s Court directing the payment of proceeds of a joint bank account in Ms name to name of decedent.) Present — Williams, P. J., Bastow, Goldman, Henry and Noonan, JJ.

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

Order unanimously affirmed, with costs to respondents payable out of the estate. Appellant’s reply brief is stricken and expunged from the records of this court. Memorandum: Whether the issue as decided was one of law or fact, we agree that the conclusion reached by the Surrogate was correct. Appellant’s reply brief is permeated with accusations and criticisms directed against respondents’ counsel and the Surrogate which we deem to be wholly unjustifiable. It should, therefore, be expunged from the records of this court. (Scholing v. O’Connor, 209 App. Div. 839; Baylis v. Wood, 246 App. Div. 779.) (Appeal by administrator from an order of Niagara Surro[624]*624gate’s Court directing the payment of proceeds of a joint bank account in Ms name to name of decedent.) Present — Williams, P. J., Bastow, Goldman, Henry and Noonan, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

23 A.D.2d 623, 1965 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4796, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-the-accounting-of-moran-nyappdiv-1965.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack