In Re the Accounting of Syracuse Trust Co.

72 N.E.2d 306, 296 N.Y. 244, 1947 N.Y. LEXIS 944
CourtNew York Court of Appeals
DecidedFebruary 28, 1947
StatusPublished
Cited by19 cases

This text of 72 N.E.2d 306 (In Re the Accounting of Syracuse Trust Co.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New York Court of Appeals 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 Syracuse Trust Co., 72 N.E.2d 306, 296 N.Y. 244, 1947 N.Y. LEXIS 944 (N.Y. 1947).

Opinion

Per Curiam.

Though the compromise agreement of January 7,1937, was made in violation of section 15 of the Personal Property Law and section 103 of the Real Property Law, the Surrogate’s decree of January 14, 1937, approving that agreement was nevertheless a conclusive adjudication of the validity thereof. The decree of January 14, 1937, was consented to by all parties in interest and no appeal therefrom was ever taken. Hence that decree was not open to the collateral attack that was made upon it by the appellants in this independent proceeding. (See Crouse v. McVickar, 207 N. Y. 213, 217; Schacht v. Schacht, 295 N. Y. 439; 1 Freeman on Judgments [5th ed.], § 357.) Douglas v. Cruger (80 N. Y. 15) is not authority for a contrary view. The determination that was under attack in the Douglas case was an order which had none of the attributes of a final adjudication. The relevant distinction is pointed out in Bannon v. Bannon (270 N. Y. 484). (See 2 Freeman on Judgments [5th ed.], § 667.)

We think the Appellate Division was right in its refusal to surcharge the trustee for the losses that resulted from the acquisition or retention of the railroad bonds in question.

The challenge to the allowances that were awarded to the referee and to the special guardian does not present any question of law.

The order should be affirmed, with costs to the respondent, payable out of the estate.

Loughran, Oh. J., Conway, Desmond, Thaoher, Dye and Fuld, JJ., concur; Lewis, J., taking no park

Order affirmed.

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

Related

In re the Judicial Settlement of the Account of Beiter
37 Misc. 3d 424 (New York Surrogate's Court, 2012)
In re the Accounting of Irving Trust Company
129 Misc. 2d 639 (New York Supreme Court, 1985)
In re the Estate of Silk
34 A.D.2d 548 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1970)
In re the Estate of Haas
33 A.D.2d 1 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1969)
Preston v. United States Trust Co.
273 F. Supp. 329 (S.D. New York, 1967)
Gunsberg v. Cantor
24 A.D.2d 999 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1965)
In re the Estate of Sykes
46 Misc. 2d 121 (New York Surrogate's Court, 1965)
In re the Estate of Thompson
34 Misc. 2d 609 (New York Surrogate's Court, 1962)
Armour v. Armour
17 Misc. 2d 48 (New York Supreme Court, 1959)
In re the Estate of Morrisey
16 Misc. 2d 421 (New York Surrogate's Court, 1958)
In re the Estate of Ryan
11 Misc. 2d 205 (New York Surrogate's Court, 1957)
In re City Bank Farmers Trust Co.
9 Misc. 2d 183 (New York Supreme Court, 1957)
In re the Construction of the Will of Adams
3 Misc. 2d 12 (New York Surrogate's Court, 1956)
In re the Accounting of Wamsley
2 Misc. 2d 482 (New York Surrogate's Court, 1956)
Erbe v. Lincoln Rochester Trust Co.
1 Misc. 2d 413 (New York Supreme Court, 1955)
In re the Estate of Barrett
286 A.D. 289 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1955)
In re the Accounting of Jennings
206 Misc. 867 (New York Surrogate's Court, 1954)
In re the Accounting of Bankers Trust Co.
203 Misc. 851 (New York Surrogate's Court, 1953)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
72 N.E.2d 306, 296 N.Y. 244, 1947 N.Y. LEXIS 944, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-the-accounting-of-syracuse-trust-co-ny-1947.