In re the Accounting of Utter

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re the Accounting of Utter

17 A.D.2d 868, 233 N.Y.S.2d 369, 1962 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7283

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

DecidedOctober 31, 1962

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 17 A.D.2d 868 (In re the Accounting of Utter) 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 Utter, 17 A.D.2d 868, 233 N.Y.S.2d 369, 1962 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7283 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1962).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal by the administrators of the goods, chattels and credits of deceased from that part of a decree of the Surrogate’s Court, Madison County, which fixed and determined the sum of $750 as compensation for respondent for legal services and expenses and directed its payment from the general estate. The services alleged by respondent to have benefited the estate were rendered at the request of his own client, one of five distributees of deceased, and in our judgment solely in the protection of his interests and without benefit to the estate. In these circumstances respondent must look to the client for his compensation. (Matter of Bacharach, 12 A D 2d 938; Matter of Luckenbach, 280 App. Div. 994, affd. 307 N. Y. 795.) Section 231-a of the Surrogate’s Court Act is not available to determine a claim for professional services allegedly rendered deceased prior to her death. Our prior decision denying respondent’s motion to dismiss the appeal upon the ground of untimeliness (13 A D 2d 579) is res judicata and not again the subject of review here. Decree modified, on the law and the facts, by striking out the second decretal paragraph and by substituting therefor a provision denying any compensation to respondent from the intestate’s estate and, as so modified, affirmed, without costs. Bergan, P. J., Coon, Gibson, Herlihy and Taylor, JJ., concur.

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

Appeal by the administrators of the goods, chattels and credits of deceased from that part of a decree of the Surrogate’s Court, Madison County, which fixed and determined the sum of $750 as compensation for respondent for legal services and expenses and directed its payment from the general estate. The services alleged by respondent to have benefited the estate were rendered at the request of his own client, one of five distributees of deceased, and in our judgment solely in the protection of his interests and without benefit to the estate. In these circumstances respondent must look to the client for his compensation. (Matter of Bacharach, 12 A D 2d 938; Matter of Luckenbach, 280 App. Div. 994, affd. 307 N. Y. 795.) Section 231-a of the Surrogate’s Court Act is not available to determine a claim for professional services allegedly rendered deceased prior to her death. Our prior decision denying respondent’s motion to dismiss the appeal upon the ground of untimeliness (13 A D 2d 579) is res judicata and not again the subject of review here. Decree modified, on the law and the facts, by striking out the second decretal paragraph and by substituting therefor a provision denying any compensation to respondent from the intestate’s estate and, as so modified, affirmed, without costs. Bergan, P. J., Coon, Gibson, Herlihy and Taylor, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

17 A.D.2d 868, 233 N.Y.S.2d 369, 1962 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7283, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-the-accounting-of-utter-nyappdiv-1962.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack