In re the Estate of Felt

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re the Estate of Felt

51 A.D.2d 532, 378 N.Y.S.2d 411

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

DecidedJanuary 29, 1976

StatusPublished

This text of 51 A.D.2d 532 (In re the Estate of Felt) 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 Felt, 51 A.D.2d 532, 378 N.Y.S.2d 411 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1976).

Pincite

Opinion

Decree of the Surrogate’s Court, New York County, entered April 16, 1975, dismissing the respondent-appellant’s objections to the executors’ account, unanimously affirmed, without costs and without disbursements. The narrow issue on this appeal is whether the court should vacate respondent-appellant’s default and remand the matter so as to afford respondent an opportunity once again to seek discovery and to examine the executors with respect to possible additional assets of the estate. The explanation given by the respondent-appellant is insufficient to warrant vacating the default. Further, at all times the Attorney-General of the State of New York, who had filed objections based on the contentions of the respondent-appellant, was available to pursue her contentions but she failed to provide him with sufficient data to enable him to do so. Concur—Stevens, P. J., Kupferman, Silverman and Capozzoli, JJ.

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

Decree of the Surrogate’s Court, New York County, entered April 16, 1975, dismissing the respondent-appellant’s objections to the executors’ account, unanimously affirmed, without costs and without disbursements. The narrow issue on this appeal is whether the court should vacate respondent-appellant’s default and remand the matter so as to afford respondent an opportunity once again to seek discovery and to examine the executors with respect to possible additional assets of the estate. The explanation given by the respondent-appellant is insufficient to warrant vacating the default. Further, at all times the Attorney-General of the State of New York, who had filed objections based on the contentions of the respondent-appellant, was available to pursue her contentions but she failed to provide him with sufficient data to enable him to do so. Concur—Stevens, P. J., Kupferman, Silverman and Capozzoli, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

51 A.D.2d 532, 378 N.Y.S.2d 411, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-the-estate-of-felt-nyappdiv-1976.