In re the Estate of Miller

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re the Estate of Miller

132 A.D.2d 662, 517 N.Y.S.2d 705, 1987 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 49207

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

DecidedJuly 20, 1987

StatusPublished

This text of 132 A.D.2d 662 (In re the Estate of Miller) 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 Miller, 132 A.D.2d 662, 517 N.Y.S.2d 705, 1987 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 49207 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1987).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal by the petitioners from a decree of the Surrogate’s Court, Nassau County (Radigan, S.), dated October 30, 1985, which dismissed a petition, inter alia, to revoke letters of trusteeship. The appeal brings up for review so much of an order of the same court, dated July 3, 1986, as, upon reargument, adhered to the original determination.

Ordered that the appeal from the decree is dismissed as superseded by the order, made upon reargument; and it is further,

Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as reviewed, for reasons stated by Surrogate Radigan; and it is further,

Ordered that the respondents are awarded one bill of costs, payable by the appellants personally. Mangano, J. P., Niehoff, Spatt and Harwood, JJ., concur.

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

Appeal by the petitioners from a decree of the Surrogate’s Court, Nassau County (Radigan, S.), dated October 30, 1985, which dismissed a petition, inter alia, to revoke letters of trusteeship. The appeal brings up for review so much of an order of the same court, dated July 3, 1986, as, upon reargument, adhered to the original determination.

Ordered that the appeal from the decree is dismissed as superseded by the order, made upon reargument; and it is further,

Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as reviewed, for reasons stated by Surrogate Radigan; and it is further,

Ordered that the respondents are awarded one bill of costs, payable by the appellants personally. Mangano, J. P., Niehoff, Spatt and Harwood, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

132 A.D.2d 662, 517 N.Y.S.2d 705, 1987 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 49207, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-the-estate-of-miller-nyappdiv-1987.