In re the Estate of Bernstein

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re the Estate of Bernstein

19 A.D.2d 897, 245 N.Y.S.2d 363, 1963 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2917

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

DecidedNovember 18, 1963

StatusPublished

This text of 19 A.D.2d 897 (In re the Estate of Bernstein) 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 Estate of Bernstein, 19 A.D.2d 897, 245 N.Y.S.2d 363, 1963 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2917 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1963).

Pincite

Opinion

In a proceeding to judicially settle the account of the executors of a decedent’s estate, the widow of one of the decedent’s legatees appeals from an order of the Surrogate’s Court, Queens County, dated January 2, 1963, which granted her motion to the extent of directing that, pursuant to section 263 of the Surrogate’s Court Act, the executor-accountants shall submit to examination as to all matters relating to their administration of the estate. The appellant contends, inter alla, that the Surrogate erred in that the order, as signed by him, is inconsistent with the decision of the predecessor Surrogate, granting her motion to examine the executors pursuant to other statutes (Surrogate’s Ct. Act, § 316; former Civ. Prac. Act, § 288). Order affirmed, without costs, and proceeding remitted to the Surrogate’s Court, Queens County, for the entry of an order fixing the appropriate dates and place for the examination and fixing the date for the filing of objections to the account. Ho opinion. Beldock, P. J., Christ, Brennan, Hill and Hopkins, JJ., concur.

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

In a proceeding to judicially settle the account of the executors of a decedent’s estate, the widow of one of the decedent’s legatees appeals from an order of the Surrogate’s Court, Queens County, dated January 2, 1963, which granted her motion to the extent of directing that, pursuant to section 263 of the Surrogate’s Court Act, the executor-accountants shall submit to examination as to all matters relating to their administration of the estate. The appellant contends, inter alla, that the Surrogate erred in that the order, as signed by him, is inconsistent with the decision of the predecessor Surrogate, granting her motion to examine the executors pursuant to other statutes (Surrogate’s Ct. Act, § 316; former Civ. Prac. Act, § 288). Order affirmed, without costs, and proceeding remitted to the Surrogate’s Court, Queens County, for the entry of an order fixing the appropriate dates and place for the examination and fixing the date for the filing of objections to the account. Ho opinion. Beldock, P. J., Christ, Brennan, Hill and Hopkins, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

19 A.D.2d 897, 245 N.Y.S.2d 363, 1963 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2917, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-the-estate-of-bernstein-nyappdiv-1963.