In re the Estate of Womsley

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re the Estate of Womsley

30 A.D.2d 866, 292 N.Y.S.2d 773, 1968 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3333

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

DecidedJuly 22, 1968

StatusPublished

This text of 30 A.D.2d 866 (In re the Estate of Womsley) 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 Womsley, 30 A.D.2d 866, 292 N.Y.S.2d 773, 1968 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3333 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1968).

Pincite

Opinion

Decree of the Surrogate’s Court, Westchester County, entered February 16, 1968, modified, on the law and the facts and in the exercise of discretion, by (1) striking out the third and fourth decretal paragraphs thereof and (2) remitting the proceeding to the Surrogate’s Court (a) for the purpose of holding a further hearing to determine whether appellants are lawfully entitled - to be credited with sums expended in the repair or renovation of the decedent’s residence and in the prosecution of the foreclosure action involving the Morton property and (b) for entry of an appropriate decree thereon. As so modified, decree affirmed insofar as appealed from, without costs. We have amended the pleadings to conform to the proof and thus read the objections of respondents as alleging that the properties at bar were acquired by the fraud and undue influence of appellant James Milano (Cowee v. Cornell, 75 N. Y. 91; Wilco Constr. Corp. v. Prywes, 14 A D 2d 929; see, 3 Weinstein-Korn-Miller, N. Y. Civ. Prac., par. 3025.31). If, in fact, appellants expended sums in the repair or renovation of the decedent’s residence and for the prosecution of thé foreclosure action with respect to the Morton property, such sums should be deducted as a credit against the amounts which they are required to pay under the decree. Brennan, Acting P. J., Rabin, Hopkins, Benjamin and Munder, JJ., concur.

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

Decree of the Surrogate’s Court, Westchester County, entered February 16, 1968, modified, on the law and the facts and in the exercise of discretion, by (1) striking out the third and fourth decretal paragraphs thereof and (2) remitting the proceeding to the Surrogate’s Court (a) for the purpose of holding a further hearing to determine whether appellants are lawfully entitled - to be credited with sums expended in the repair or renovation of the decedent’s residence and in the prosecution of the foreclosure action involving the Morton property and (b) for entry of an appropriate decree thereon. As so modified, decree affirmed insofar as appealed from, without costs. We have amended the pleadings to conform to the proof and thus read the objections of respondents as alleging that the properties at bar were acquired by the fraud and undue influence of appellant James Milano (Cowee v. Cornell, 75 N. Y. 91; Wilco Constr. Corp. v. Prywes, 14 A D 2d 929; see, 3 Weinstein-Korn-Miller, N. Y. Civ. Prac., par. 3025.31). If, in fact, appellants expended sums in the repair or renovation of the decedent’s residence and for the prosecution of thé foreclosure action with respect to the Morton property, such sums should be deducted as a credit against the amounts which they are required to pay under the decree. Brennan, Acting P. J., Rabin, Hopkins, Benjamin and Munder, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

30 A.D.2d 866, 292 N.Y.S.2d 773, 1968 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3333, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-the-estate-of-womsley-nyappdiv-1968.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack