In re the Estate of Sheridan

New York Surrogate's Court

In re the Estate of Sheridan

39 Misc. 2d 343, 240 N.Y.S.2d 481, 1963 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 1979

CourtNew York Surrogate's Court

DecidedMay 31, 1963

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 39 Misc. 2d 343 (In re the Estate of Sheridan) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New York Surrogate's Court 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 Sheridan, 39 Misc. 2d 343, 240 N.Y.S.2d 481, 1963 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 1979 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1963).

Pincite

Opinion

Maurice W. McCann, Acting Surrogate.

The executors of the estate of Emma E. Sheridan have filed their petition seeking by way of a discovery proceeding to compel the respondent to turn over the sum of $2,280 which they allege in their petition was leaned by the decedent to the respondent, John K. Hicks.

Sections 205 and 206 of the Surrogate’s Court Act provide for discovery proceedings such as this one. Such proceedings are now liberally construed. This proceeding cannot however be used to collect the debt alleged in this petition. The courts have held consistently that discovery proceedings are not available to collect a common debt. Such obligations must be enforced in a common-law court. (Matter of Thoms, 165 Misc. 398; Matter of Faulkner, 134 Misc. 507; Matter of Thomas, 235 App. Div. 450.)

The application is, therefore, denied and the proceeding dismissed without prejudice to the rights of the executors to proceed in a different manner and forum to enforce their rights,, if any, to the funds in question.

Submit decree in accordance with this decision.

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

Maurice W. McCann, Acting Surrogate.

The executors of the estate of Emma E. Sheridan have filed their petition seeking by way of a discovery proceeding to compel the respondent to turn over the sum of $2,280 which they allege in their petition was leaned by the decedent to the respondent, John K. Hicks.

Sections 205 and 206 of the Surrogate’s Court Act provide for discovery proceedings such as this one. Such proceedings are now liberally construed. This proceeding cannot however be used to collect the debt alleged in this petition. The courts have held consistently that discovery proceedings are not available to collect a common debt. Such obligations must be enforced in a common-law court. (Matter of Thoms, 165 Misc. 398; Matter of Faulkner, 134 Misc. 507; Matter of Thomas, 235 App. Div. 450.)

The application is, therefore, denied and the proceeding dismissed without prejudice to the rights of the executors to proceed in a different manner and forum to enforce their rights,, if any, to the funds in question.

Submit decree in accordance with this decision.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

39 Misc. 2d 343, 240 N.Y.S.2d 481, 1963 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 1979, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-the-estate-of-sheridan-nysurct-1963.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack