In re the Estate of Jennings

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re the Estate of Jennings

283 A.D. 1071, 131 N.Y.S.2d 895, 1954 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6348

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

DecidedJune 7, 1954

StatusPublished

This text of 283 A.D. 1071 (In re the Estate of Jennings) 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 Jennings, 283 A.D. 1071, 131 N.Y.S.2d 895, 1954 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6348 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1954).

Pincite

Opinion

The decedents, husband and wife, whose estates are involved in these proceedings, died on July 13, 1948, and their respective estates are being administered together by two brothers of the deceased husband. One of said administrators appeals from a separate order of the Surrogate’s Court, Kings County, entered in each estate, after a hearing before an official referee, directing them to pay certain fees and disbursements to the attorneys for the other administrator. Upon the argument hereof, respondents moved by oral motion to dismiss the appeals herein upon the [1072]*1072ground that the respective records filed by appellant are incomplete. Orders affirmed, with $10 costs and disbursements, payable on each appeal out of the respective estates. No opinion. In view of the foregoing determination, oral motion to dismiss the appeals denied, as academic, without costs. Nolan, P. J., Adel, MaeCrate, Schmidt and Murphy, JJ., concur. [See 284 App. Div. 850.]

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

The decedents, husband and wife, whose estates are involved in these proceedings, died on July 13, 1948, and their respective estates are being administered together by two brothers of the deceased husband. One of said administrators appeals from a separate order of the Surrogate’s Court, Kings County, entered in each estate, after a hearing before an official referee, directing them to pay certain fees and disbursements to the attorneys for the other administrator. Upon the argument hereof, respondents moved by oral motion to dismiss the appeals herein upon the [1072]*1072ground that the respective records filed by appellant are incomplete. Orders affirmed, with $10 costs and disbursements, payable on each appeal out of the respective estates. No opinion. In view of the foregoing determination, oral motion to dismiss the appeals denied, as academic, without costs. Nolan, P. J., Adel, MaeCrate, Schmidt and Murphy, JJ., concur. [See 284 App. Div. 850.]

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

283 A.D. 1071, 131 N.Y.S.2d 895, 1954 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6348, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-the-estate-of-jennings-nyappdiv-1954.