In re the Judicial Settlement of the Account of Odell

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re the Judicial Settlement of the Account of Odell

164 A.D. 929

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

DecidedOctober 15, 1914

StatusPublished

This text of 164 A.D. 929 (In re the Judicial Settlement of the Account of Odell) 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 Judicial Settlement of the Account of Odell, 164 A.D. 929 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1914).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam:

We think the trustee should have been allowed, in the settlement of her account, $200, the amount of commissions paid by her upon the sale of certain lots in the Wakefield tract. The referee, in his opinion, overruled the contestant’s objections to these payments, but there was no mention of them in his report, or in the decree of the Surrogate’s Court confirming the same, and the trustee was charged with the gross amount of sales. This was evidently an inadvertence. The decree, therefore, should be modified by crediting the trustee with the sum of $200; and as thus modified affirmed, with costs to the respondent. Present — Ingraham, P. J., McLaughlin, Laughlin, Clarke and Scott, JJ. Order modified as directed in opinion, and as modified affirmed, with costs to the respondent. Order to be settled on notice.

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

Per Curiam:

We think the trustee should have been allowed, in the settlement of her account, $200, the amount of commissions paid by her upon the sale of certain lots in the Wakefield tract. The referee, in his opinion, overruled the contestant’s objections to these payments, but there was no mention of them in his report, or in the decree of the Surrogate’s Court confirming the same, and the trustee was charged with the gross amount of sales. This was evidently an inadvertence. The decree, therefore, should be modified by crediting the trustee with the sum of $200; and as thus modified affirmed, with costs to the respondent. Present — Ingraham, P. J., McLaughlin, Laughlin, Clarke and Scott, JJ. Order modified as directed in opinion, and as modified affirmed, with costs to the respondent. Order to be settled on notice.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

164 A.D. 929, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-the-judicial-settlement-of-the-account-of-odell-nyappdiv-1914.