In re the Estate of Locke

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re the Estate of Locke

17 A.D.2d 950, 1962 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7232

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

DecidedNovember 5, 1962

StatusPublished

This text of 17 A.D.2d 950 (In re the Estate of Locke) 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 Locke, 17 A.D.2d 950, 1962 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7232 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1962).

Pincite

Opinion

In a proceeding for the judicial settlement of an executor’s final account, in which Morris Locke, the decedent’s surviving spouse, filed objections to said account, the petitioner-executor appeals from an order of the Surrogate’s Court, Queens County, dated March 26, 1962 which denied his motion: [951]*951(a) to dismiss said objections as sham and frivolous; for summary judgment; and for judgment on the pleadings settling his account as filed (Rules Civ. Prae., rules 104,112, 113); and (b) denied so much of his alternative motion to require the objectant to serve and file a bill of particulars of his objections, as disallowed all the items in petitioner’s demand therefor except items 1 and 2. The order directed objectant to file the bill of particulars as limited within 10 days after he shall have completed his examination before trial of the petitioner-executor. Order modified so as to grant the petitioner-executor’s motion for a bill of particulars to the further extent of allowing items 5 (a) and 6 (a) of the demand, in addition to items 1 and 2; as so modified, the order is affirmed, without costs. The examination of the petitioner-executor shall proceed on 10 days’ written notice or on such other date as the parties may mutually fix. In our opinion, the petitioner is entitled to items 5 (a) and 6 (a) of his demand, in addition to items 1 and 2. Beldock, P. J., Ughetta, Kleinfeld, Hill and Rabin, JJ., concur.

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

In a proceeding for the judicial settlement of an executor’s final account, in which Morris Locke, the decedent’s surviving spouse, filed objections to said account, the petitioner-executor appeals from an order of the Surrogate’s Court, Queens County, dated March 26, 1962 which denied his motion: [951]*951(a) to dismiss said objections as sham and frivolous; for summary judgment; and for judgment on the pleadings settling his account as filed (Rules Civ. Prae., rules 104,112, 113); and (b) denied so much of his alternative motion to require the objectant to serve and file a bill of particulars of his objections, as disallowed all the items in petitioner’s demand therefor except items 1 and 2. The order directed objectant to file the bill of particulars as limited within 10 days after he shall have completed his examination before trial of the petitioner-executor. Order modified so as to grant the petitioner-executor’s motion for a bill of particulars to the further extent of allowing items 5 (a) and 6 (a) of the demand, in addition to items 1 and 2; as so modified, the order is affirmed, without costs. The examination of the petitioner-executor shall proceed on 10 days’ written notice or on such other date as the parties may mutually fix. In our opinion, the petitioner is entitled to items 5 (a) and 6 (a) of his demand, in addition to items 1 and 2. Beldock, P. J., Ughetta, Kleinfeld, Hill and Rabin, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

17 A.D.2d 950, 1962 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7232, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-the-estate-of-locke-nyappdiv-1962.