In re the Judicial Settlement of the Account of Woolley

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re the Judicial Settlement of the Account of Woolley

162 A.D. 330, 147 N.Y.S. 518, 1914 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6001

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided May 8, 1914·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

Per Curiam:

The objections are to two items, one of $8.75 for certain petty disbursements sufficiently specified, and the other of $50 paid as the tax upon certain mortgages. The ground of the objections is that the items were “not properly chargeable against this estate at this time.” There is nothing to indicate any basis for this objection as to the first item of $8.75. The avowed ground of the objection as to the second item is that it appears the $50 was paid not directly by the trustee but by his attorneys. We think it may be regarded as a payment by the trustee.

The costs should be cut down. The item of $70 awarded as costs where there is a contest, should be reduced to $25. (Matter of Hogarty, 62 App. Div. 79, 87.) The item of $40 for preparing the account, and the item of $20 for preparing for the hearing, should each be reduced one-half, and the costs should be decreed as payable to the trustee, not to his attorneys. (Matter of Wright, 121 App. Div. 581.) The decree is modified as indicated in this opinion, and as so modified is affirmed, without costs.

Jenks, P. J., Burr, Thomas, Carr and Rich, JJ., concurred.

Decree of the Surrogate’s Court of Queens county modified in accordance with opinion, and as modified affirmed, without costs.

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

Per Curiam:

The objections are to two items, one of $8.75 for certain petty disbursements sufficiently specified, and the other of $50 paid as the tax upon certain mortgages. The ground of the objections is that the items were “not properly chargeable against this estate at this time.” There is nothing to indicate any basis for this objection as to the first item of $8.75. The avowed ground of the objection as to the second item is that it appears the $50 was paid not directly by the trustee but by his attorneys. We think it may be regarded as a payment by the trustee.

The costs should be cut down. The item of $70 awarded as costs where there is a contest, should be reduced to $25. (Matter of Hogarty, 62 App. Div. 79, 87.) The item of $40 for preparing the account, and the item of $20 for preparing for the hearing, should each be reduced one-half, and the costs should be decreed as payable to the trustee, not to his attorneys. (Matter of Wright, 121 App. Div. 581.) The decree is modified as indicated in this opinion, and as so modified is affirmed, without costs.

Jenks, P. J., Burr, Thomas, Carr and Rich, JJ., concurred.

Decree of the Surrogate’s Court of Queens county modified in accordance with opinion, and as modified affirmed, without costs.

In re the Judicial Settlement of the Account of Woolley, 162 A.D. 330, 147 N.Y.S. 518, 1914 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6001 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1914).

Pincite

162 A.D. 330 (In re the Judicial Settlement of the Account of Woolley) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related