In re the Estate of Wayand

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re the Estate of Wayand

25 A.D.2d 836, 270 N.Y.S.2d 59, 1966 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4228

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

DecidedMay 17, 1966

StatusPublished

This text of 25 A.D.2d 836 (In re the Estate of Wayand) 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 Wayand, 25 A.D.2d 836, 270 N.Y.S.2d 59, 1966 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4228 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1966).

Pincite

Opinion

Order of Surrogate’s Court, entered June 23, 1965, unanimously reversed, on the law and the facts, with $30 costs and disbursements payable out of the funds to the appellants, and application by Klara Wayand and Magdolna Matos for withdrawal of funds on deposit with Director of Finance of the City of New York to their credit, granted. The applicants, who are citizens and residents of Hungary, were the widow and daughter, and the distributees, of an intestate who died a resident of Bronx County on December 26, 1950. On judicial settlement of the accounts of the Public Administrator, the Surrogate ordered that the amounts of $2,392.22 and $4,274.40, representing their respective distributive shares, be paid to and deposited with the City Treasurer of the City of New York (now Director of Finance) on the ground that the said distributees were nationals and residents of Hungary and would not have the use, benefit or control of the money due them. A hearing was held on the present application for the withdrawal and payment to them of the funds on deposit. Upon the proceedings and evidence, it satisfactorily appears that, on payment to them in Hungary, the applicants will receive the benefit, use and control of the funds, and, thus, their application should have been granted. (Surrogate’s Ct. Act, § 269-a; see, also, Matter of Reidl, 23 A D 2d 171; Matter of Greenberg, 24 A D 2d 435; Matter of Saniuk, 40 Misc 2d 437, affd. 21 A D 2d 922, mot. for lv. to app. den. 15 N Y 2d 482; Matter of Siegler, 25 A D 2d 805.) Settle order on notice to Public Administrator and to Director of Finance.

Concur — Botein, P. J., Breitel, Rabin and Eager, JJ.

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

Order of Surrogate’s Court, entered June 23, 1965, unanimously reversed, on the law and the facts, with $30 costs and disbursements payable out of the funds to the appellants, and application by Klara Wayand and Magdolna Matos for withdrawal of funds on deposit with Director of Finance of the City of New York to their credit, granted. The applicants, who are citizens and residents of Hungary, were the widow and daughter, and the distributees, of an intestate who died a resident of Bronx County on December 26, 1950. On judicial settlement of the accounts of the Public Administrator, the Surrogate ordered that the amounts of $2,392.22 and $4,274.40, representing their respective distributive shares, be paid to and deposited with the City Treasurer of the City of New York (now Director of Finance) on the ground that the said distributees were nationals and residents of Hungary and would not have the use, benefit or control of the money due them. A hearing was held on the present application for the withdrawal and payment to them of the funds on deposit. Upon the proceedings and evidence, it satisfactorily appears that, on payment to them in Hungary, the applicants will receive the benefit, use and control of the funds, and, thus, their application should have been granted. (Surrogate’s Ct. Act, § 269-a; see, also, Matter of Reidl, 23 A D 2d 171; Matter of Greenberg, 24 A D 2d 435; Matter of Saniuk, 40 Misc 2d 437, affd. 21 A D 2d 922, mot. for lv. to app. den. 15 N Y 2d 482; Matter of Siegler, 25 A D 2d 805.) Settle order on notice to Public Administrator and to Director of Finance.

Concur — Botein, P. J., Breitel, Rabin and Eager, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

25 A.D.2d 836, 270 N.Y.S.2d 59, 1966 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4228, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-the-estate-of-wayand-nyappdiv-1966.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack