From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Fleckenstein v. Osler

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Mar 1, 1930
228 App. Div. 872 (N.Y. App. Div. 1930)

Opinion

March, 1930.

Appeal from Supreme Court, Orleans County.

Present — Sears, P.J., Crouch, Taylor, Thompson and Crosby, JJ.


Motion to amend record on appeal.


We are not called upon to say whether, under section 40 of the Surrogate's Court Act, as it read in 1919, the surrogate, in the judicial accounting of the executrix, had authority to settle a contest over the title to real estate between the executrix, who was remainderman devisee of the real property, and testator's husband, who claimed title as a cestui que trust of the testator. For such authority could not be exercised unless the question of that title were "necessary to be determined in order to make a full, equitable and complete disposition of the matter" before the court. (Surr. Ct. Act, § 40; Matter of Hermann, 178 App. Div. 182, 190; affd., 222 N.Y. 564.) The record in the judicial accounting now under consideration shows that the only objections interposed, the only questions determined, involved the disposition of personal property as between the executor and the contestant and otherwise. No claim of title to real estate was made and no such question came within the contemplation of the surrogate. In the argument, and in her brief on this appeal, respondent has abandoned her claims that the probate decree was res adjudicata, and that the Statute of Frauds bars appellant. We will, therefore, not discuss those questions. It follows that, in the trial of the instant equity action, whatever effect may be given to the papers and proceedings involved in the judicial settlement by way of estoppel or as admissions against interest by John F. Snow, the surrogate's decree, for the reasons given, cannot be held a bar as res adjudicata to the carrying on of this action. The order appealed from should be reversed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements, and the motion denied, with ten dollars costs. All concur.

See Code Civ. Proc. § 2510, as amd. by Laws of 1914, chap. 443. — [REP.

Since amd. by Laws of 1921, chap. 439, and Laws of 1924, chap. 100. — [REP.

See Rules Civ. Prac. rule 107. — [REP.


Motion to amend record by adding copies of will of Harriet T. Snow, deceased, and of account of Leah S. Osler as executrix, and proceedings had on accounting, granted, pursuant to stipulation. Order reversed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements, and motion denied, with ten dollars costs.


Summaries of

Fleckenstein v. Osler

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Mar 1, 1930
228 App. Div. 872 (N.Y. App. Div. 1930)
Case details for

Fleckenstein v. Osler

Case Details

Full title:GEORGE V. FLECKENSTEIN, as Administrator, etc., of JOHN F. SNOW and…

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department

Date published: Mar 1, 1930

Citations

228 App. Div. 872 (N.Y. App. Div. 1930)

Citing Cases

In re the Estate of Poth

( Matter of Bush, 243 A.D. 322, 324; Matter of McArdle, 140 Misc. 257; Matter of Engel, Id. 276, 284; Matter…

Matter of Collins

(Surr.Ct. Act, § 40 Surr. Ct. Proc. Act. See Fleckenstein v. Osler, 228 A.D. 872.) "It is established as…