In re the Estate of Matranga

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re the Estate of Matranga

25 A.D.2d 782, 269 N.Y.S.2d 514, 1966 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4444

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

DecidedApril 25, 1966

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 25 A.D.2d 782 (In re the Estate of Matranga) 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 Matranga, 25 A.D.2d 782, 269 N.Y.S.2d 514, 1966 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4444 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1966).

Pincite

Opinion

In a proceeding to settle an executor’s account, a claimant appeals, as limited by her brief, from so much of a decree of the Surrogate’s Court, Westchester County, entered October 5, 1965 upon a decision of the court after a nonjury trial, as disallowed her claim in the sum of $25,910 for domestic and home nursing services allegedly performed by her at the request of and for the decedent, her uncle, for approximately 16 years prior to his death, upon his alleged promise that he would provide for her. Decree, insofar as appealed from, affirmed, without costs. In our opinion, the Surrogate was fully warranted in finding that the testimony offered in support of appellant’s claim fell far short of being clear and convincing, as required in such a ease. (McKeon v. Van Slyck, 223 N. Y. 392, 397-398; Rosseau v. Rouss, 180 N. Y. 116, 121; Kearney v. McKeon, 85 N. Y. 136, 139-140; Matter of Kane, 236 N Y S 2d 975, 976.)

Ughetta, Acting P. J., Christ, Hill, Rabin and Benjamin, JJ., concur.

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

In a proceeding to settle an executor’s account, a claimant appeals, as limited by her brief, from so much of a decree of the Surrogate’s Court, Westchester County, entered October 5, 1965 upon a decision of the court after a nonjury trial, as disallowed her claim in the sum of $25,910 for domestic and home nursing services allegedly performed by her at the request of and for the decedent, her uncle, for approximately 16 years prior to his death, upon his alleged promise that he would provide for her. Decree, insofar as appealed from, affirmed, without costs. In our opinion, the Surrogate was fully warranted in finding that the testimony offered in support of appellant’s claim fell far short of being clear and convincing, as required in such a ease. (McKeon v. Van Slyck, 223 N. Y. 392, 397-398; Rosseau v. Rouss, 180 N. Y. 116, 121; Kearney v. McKeon, 85 N. Y. 136, 139-140; Matter of Kane, 236 N Y S 2d 975, 976.)

Ughetta, Acting P. J., Christ, Hill, Rabin and Benjamin, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

25 A.D.2d 782, 269 N.Y.S.2d 514, 1966 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4444, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-the-estate-of-matranga-nyappdiv-1966.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack