In re the Estate of Squadrito

New York Surrogate's Court

In re the Estate of Squadrito

26 Misc. 2d 978, 209 N.Y.S.2d 357, 1960 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 2338

New York Surrogate's Court·Decided October 11, 1960·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

Maximilian Moss, S.

Petitioner seeks this court’s consent for leave to transfer an action commenced by respondent, Joseph Castellaneta, in the Supreme Court, Kings County, in which a corporation, several individuals and the administrator of decedent’s estate have been joined as defendants. The alleged cause of action consists of a claim based upon two promissory notes made by the corporation, each of which was indorsed by decedent in Ms lifetime, together with three other individuals as parties.

The recovery of a judgment against the legal representative of a decedent’s estate does not entitle the debt to a preference in payment over others of the same class (Matter of Nelson, 63 Misc. 627, 630; Matter of Bernard, 177 Misc. 712; Matter of Phillips, 169 Misc. 86; Surrogate’s Ct. Act, § 212, subd. 4). In addition, it appears therefrom that this court could not award to the plaintiff the complete r'elief to which he might be entitled. The application is therefore denied. Settle order on notice.

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

Maximilian Moss, S.

Petitioner seeks this court’s consent for leave to transfer an action commenced by respondent, Joseph Castellaneta, in the Supreme Court, Kings County, in which a corporation, several individuals and the administrator of decedent’s estate have been joined as defendants. The alleged cause of action consists of a claim based upon two promissory notes made by the corporation, each of which was indorsed by decedent in Ms lifetime, together with three other individuals as parties.

The recovery of a judgment against the legal representative of a decedent’s estate does not entitle the debt to a preference in payment over others of the same class (Matter of Nelson, 63 Misc. 627, 630; Matter of Bernard, 177 Misc. 712; Matter of Phillips, 169 Misc. 86; Surrogate’s Ct. Act, § 212, subd. 4). In addition, it appears therefrom that this court could not award to the plaintiff the complete r'elief to which he might be entitled. The application is therefore denied. Settle order on notice.

In re the Estate of Squadrito, 26 Misc. 2d 978, 209 N.Y.S.2d 357, 1960 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 2338 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1960).

Pincite

26 Misc. 2d 978 (In re the Estate of Squadrito) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related