Kellogg v. Werner

New York Supreme Court

Kellogg v. Werner

13 N.Y. Sup. Ct. 452

DecidedJanuary 15, 1876

StatusPublished

This text of 13 N.Y. Sup. Ct. 452 (Kellogg v. Werner) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New York Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Kellogg v. Werner, 13 N.Y. Sup. Ct. 452 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1876).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Ouriam:

We are of opinion that, in the ease of a statutory reference, had between an executor or administrator and a claimant against the estate (under 2 R. S., [m. p.] 89, § 36, etc.), the rule of this court requiring the filing of the testimony taken before the referee (rule 43), does not apply. For this reason the order of the Special Term should be reversed, with ten dollars costs, and printing disbursements, without prejudice to any right of review of the referee’s report.

Present — Learned, P. J., Bocees and Boardman, JJ.

Order reversed, with ten dollars costs and printing.

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

Per Ouriam:

We are of opinion that, in the ease of a statutory reference, had between an executor or administrator and a claimant against the estate (under 2 R. S., [m. p.] 89, § 36, etc.), the rule of this court requiring the filing of the testimony taken before the referee (rule 43), does not apply. For this reason the order of the Special Term should be reversed, with ten dollars costs, and printing disbursements, without prejudice to any right of review of the referee’s report.

Present — Learned, P. J., Bocees and Boardman, JJ.

Order reversed, with ten dollars costs and printing.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

13 N.Y. Sup. Ct. 452, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/kellogg-v-werner-nysupct-1876.