In re the Estate of Crichton

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re the Estate of Crichton

26 A.D.2d 639, 272 N.Y.S.2d 987, 1966 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3677

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

DecidedJuly 5, 1966

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 26 A.D.2d 639 (In re the Estate of Crichton) 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 Crichton, 26 A.D.2d 639, 272 N.Y.S.2d 987, 1966 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3677 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1966).

Pincite

Opinion

In a proceeding to Settle an éxécutrix’ account, in Which tihe the parties made á motion tó substitute attOrñéys, Sidhfey S. BOtitié (the original attorney) appeals, as limited by his briefs, from so miieh o'f an order of the Surrogate’s Court, Westchester County, entered April 5, 1966, granting such motion, as failed to fix th§ ¿mount of his fee, and instead,- inter alia, provided for its future deteffhiiiatiOn. Order insdfaí as_ áppéaíéd from, affirmed, With $Í0 costs and disb'tirs8ffiéntS payable by appellant personally to thé respondent, without prejudice to appeliárit’s remedy, if any, ufadér Séetitin 231-a Of the Surrogate's Court Act. No opinion. Christ, Acting P. J., Brennan, Hill, Hopkins and concur.

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

In a proceeding to Settle an éxécutrix’ account, in Which tihe the parties made á motion tó substitute attOrñéys, Sidhfey S. BOtitié (the original attorney) appeals, as limited by his briefs, from so miieh o'f an order of the Surrogate’s Court, Westchester County, entered April 5, 1966, granting such motion, as failed to fix th§ ¿mount of his fee, and instead,- inter alia, provided for its future deteffhiiiatiOn. Order insdfaí as_ áppéaíéd from, affirmed, With $Í0 costs and disb'tirs8ffiéntS payable by appellant personally to thé respondent, without prejudice to appeliárit’s remedy, if any, ufadér Séetitin 231-a Of the Surrogate's Court Act. No opinion. Christ, Acting P. J., Brennan, Hill, Hopkins and concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

26 A.D.2d 639, 272 N.Y.S.2d 987, 1966 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3677, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-the-estate-of-crichton-nyappdiv-1966.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack