In re the Final Judicial Settlement of the Account of Cohen

258 A.D. 891, 16 N.Y.S.2d 247, 1939 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7462
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedDecember 4, 1939
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 258 A.D. 891 (In re the Final Judicial Settlement of the Account of Cohen) 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 Final Judicial Settlement of the Account of Cohen, 258 A.D. 891, 16 N.Y.S.2d 247, 1939 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7462 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1939).

Opinion

In a proceeding in the Surrogate’s Court, Richmond county, for the judicial settlement of the executors-trustees’ account, decree modified by striking out the provision which disallows the trustees’ claim for commissions on the real estate and by striking out the provisions providing for the payment of $2,000 to the seven objecting legatees; and the matter is remitted to the Surrogate’s Court of Richmond county to determine the amount of commissions payable to the trustees for receiving the real property, and to limit the amount of the surcharge to that necessary to pay the proportion of $2,000 to the seven objecting legatees which their interests bear to the interests of all the legatees. As thus modified the decree, in so far as appealed from, is unanimously affirmed, with costs to appellants-executors-trustees, payable out of the estate; and with costs to respondent Abraham Block and the special guardian, payable by claimant-appellant, Joseph Green, personally. The real property was devised to the trustees and they were authorized to sell. The property has, therefore, been received within the meaning of section 285 of the Surrogate’s Court Act, and the trustees are entitled to half commissions for receiving. (Matter of Berns, 188 App. Div. 215.) The surcharge should be limited to the amount necessary to satisfy the shares therein of the seven objecting legatees, namely, 3,000/18,300 of $2,000. (Matter of Garvin, 256 N. Y. 518; Matter of Stumpp, 153 Misc. 92, 100-101; Matter of Young, 156 id. 795, 800.) The evidence supports the disallowance of the claim against the estate made by appellant Joseph Green. There was no abuse of discretion in the allowance of attorneys’ fees. Present — Lazansky, P. J., Johnston, Adel, Taylor and Close, JJ.

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

Related

Breswick & Co. v. Briggs
138 F. Supp. 747 (S.D. New York, 1956)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
258 A.D. 891, 16 N.Y.S.2d 247, 1939 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7462, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-the-final-judicial-settlement-of-the-account-of-cohen-nyappdiv-1939.