In re the Estate of Rees

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re the Estate of Rees

141 A.D.2d 649, 529 N.Y.S.2d 996, 1988 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6645

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided June 13, 1988·Published·Cited by 3 cases

Opinion

In a proceeding to judicially settle the account of the estate of Imogene V. Rees, the attorney-coexecutor of the estate appeals from so much of a decree of the Surrogate’s Court, Queens County (Laurino, S.), dated December 2, 1986, as fixed his legal fee at $2,500.

Ordered that the decree is reversed insofar as appealed from, with costs payable by the estate, and the matter is remitted to the Surrogate’s Court, Queens County, for further proceedings in accordance herewith.

We are unable to determine from the decision herein precisely which of the services performed by the appellant the court found to be legal in nature to be compensated by fees and which services were executorial in nature and were compensated by commission. Accordingly, we remit the matter to the Surrogate to conduct a hearing to distinguish between the two types of services performed and to make findings in accordance with the criteria set forth in Matter of Freeman (34 NY2d 1) as to the nature of the legal services performed and the fair and reasonable value thereof (see, Matter of Berger, 141 AD2d 639 [decided herewith]). Bracken, J. P., Brown, Rubin and Sullivan, JJ., concur.

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

In a proceeding to judicially settle the account of the estate of Imogene V. Rees, the attorney-coexecutor of the estate appeals from so much of a decree of the Surrogate’s Court, Queens County (Laurino, S.), dated December 2, 1986, as fixed his legal fee at $2,500.

Ordered that the decree is reversed insofar as appealed from, with costs payable by the estate, and the matter is remitted to the Surrogate’s Court, Queens County, for further proceedings in accordance herewith.

We are unable to determine from the decision herein precisely which of the services performed by the appellant the court found to be legal in nature to be compensated by fees and which services were executorial in nature and were compensated by commission. Accordingly, we remit the matter to the Surrogate to conduct a hearing to distinguish between the two types of services performed and to make findings in accordance with the criteria set forth in Matter of Freeman (34 NY2d 1) as to the nature of the legal services performed and the fair and reasonable value thereof (see, Matter of Berger, 141 AD2d 639 [decided herewith]). Bracken, J. P., Brown, Rubin and Sullivan, JJ., concur.

In re the Estate of Rees, 141 A.D.2d 649, 529 N.Y.S.2d 996, 1988 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6645 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1988).

Pincite

141 A.D.2d 649 (In re the Estate of Rees) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related