In re the Estate of Marks
This text of 342 A.2d 225 (In re the Estate of Marks) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
The judgment of the Hudson County Court, Probate Division, is affirmed substantially for the reasons expressed in the opinion of Judge Gaulkin.
We also conclude that the trial court properly denied plaintiff’s application for counsel fees to be assessed against $23,008.12 held in escrow pending the court’s decision. The action brought by plaintiff was solely to advance his own interests. The money held in escrow was not a fund in court within contemplation of R. 4:42-9 (a) (2). See Sunset Beach Amusement Corp. v. Belk, 33 N. J. 162 (1960); Shilowitz v. Shilowitz, 115 N. J. Super. 165, 188 (Ch. Div. 1971), mod. on other grounds, 119 N. J. Super. 311 (App. Div. 1972), certif. den. 62 N. J. 72 (1972).
Affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
342 A.2d 225, 134 N.J. Super. 510, 1975 N.J. Super. LEXIS 782, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-the-estate-of-marks-njsuperctappdiv-1975.