In re the Estate of Blumenthal

New York Surrogate's Court

In re the Estate of Blumenthal

147 Misc. 549, 265 N.Y.S. 616, 1933 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 1174

DecidedApril 26, 1933

StatusPublished

This text of 147 Misc. 549 (In re the Estate of Blumenthal) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New York Surrogate's Court 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 Blumenthal, 147 Misc. 549, 265 N.Y.S. 616, 1933 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 1174 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1933).

Pincite

Opinion

Delehanty, S.

By appropriate order dated March 28, 1933, respondent was directed to make and file his account as executor of the above-named deceased within ten days. He has failed to do so This failure is only the latest of several in respect of the directions of this court in this estate. ' Respondent is a lawyer and hence doubly required to conform to the directions of the court. Instead of doing so he now seeks further to evade his obligation [550]*550by raising technical objections Among these is the alleged failure to serve upon him a certified copy of the order in question. By section 260 of the Surrogate’s Court Act respondent is bound by this order, without service thereof. The statements in the respondent’s affidavit sworn to on April 26, 1933, respecting the lack of intention to disobey the order of the court, cannot be credited. Respondent is adjudged in contempt. Submit order for and warrant of commitment.

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

Delehanty, S.

By appropriate order dated March 28, 1933, respondent was directed to make and file his account as executor of the above-named deceased within ten days. He has failed to do so This failure is only the latest of several in respect of the directions of this court in this estate. ' Respondent is a lawyer and hence doubly required to conform to the directions of the court. Instead of doing so he now seeks further to evade his obligation [550]*550by raising technical objections Among these is the alleged failure to serve upon him a certified copy of the order in question. By section 260 of the Surrogate’s Court Act respondent is bound by this order, without service thereof. The statements in the respondent’s affidavit sworn to on April 26, 1933, respecting the lack of intention to disobey the order of the court, cannot be credited. Respondent is adjudged in contempt. Submit order for and warrant of commitment.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

147 Misc. 549, 265 N.Y.S. 616, 1933 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 1174, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-the-estate-of-blumenthal-nysurct-1933.