In re the Judicial Settlement of the Account of Proceedings of Limberg

256 A.D. 1104, 11 N.Y.S.2d 897, 1939 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6299
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedApril 24, 1939
StatusPublished
Cited by2 cases

This text of 256 A.D. 1104 (In re the Judicial Settlement of the Account of Proceedings of Limberg) 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 Proceedings of Limberg, 256 A.D. 1104, 11 N.Y.S.2d 897, 1939 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6299 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1939).

Opinion

Cross-appeals from a decree of the Surrogate’s Court, Queens county. Decree modified by striking out the charge against the appellant-respondent of $1,035 for use and occupancy of a portion of the real property; by striking out the sum of $547.90 allowed as commissions, and substituting in place thereof the sum of $129.55; and by adjusting the totals in the decree in conformity therewith. As thus modified the decree, in so far as appeal is taken, is unanimously affirmed, with costs to the appellant-respondent and the respondent-appellant, payable out of the estate. A distributee in possession may not be charged in this proceeding for use and occupancy of a portion of the common property. The appellant-respondent is not entitled to commissions on the mortgage certificates, nor on the Liberdar and D’Avanzo mortgages, all of which are directed to be turned over to the administratrix. He is entitled to commissions on the moneys actually collected in the sum of $4,075.45, representing income from real and personal property and payments on the mortgage certificates. Commissions on said sum will be allowed as follows: on $2,000, $100; on $288.37, $7.21; on $1,787.08, $22.34; total $129.55. He will be allowed full commissions for moneys actually received and paid out as shown in the approved schedules. He will be allowed half commissions on moneys collected and turned over to the administrator by order of the surrogate. (Matter of Hurst, 111 App. Div. 460.) Present — Lazansky, P. J., Hagarty, Johnston, Adel and Taylor, JJ. Settle order on notice.

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

Related

Solis v. Schueneman
685 A.2d 1181 (Court of Special Appeals of Maryland, 1996)
In re the Estate of Owens
36 Misc. 2d 1031 (New York Surrogate's Court, 1962)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
256 A.D. 1104, 11 N.Y.S.2d 897, 1939 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6299, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-the-judicial-settlement-of-the-account-of-proceedings-of-limberg-nyappdiv-1939.