From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Matter of Pollak

Surrogate's Court of the City of New York, New York County
Sep 18, 1944
183 Misc. 671 (N.Y. Misc. 1944)

Opinion

September 18, 1944.

Joseph H. Robins for petitioners.

Joseph Berkley for respondent.



A respondent in a discovery proceeding in this court has challenged its jurisdiction because process was served upon him outside this State. He is plaintiff in an action to reduce to his ownership the fund represented by a savings bank account in a savings bank which is also a respondent in the discovery proceeding, which seeks adjudication of the title to the same bank account. The transfer to this court of the action now pending in the Supreme Court would normally be followed by a consolidation of the action with the discovery proceeding pending here. In the consolidated proceeding there would be no question of jurisdiction open and the consolidated proceeding would go to judgment on the merits.

There is no substance to a claim that the form of the action in the Supreme Court precludes a transfer to this court. ( Matter of Shea, 262 A.D. 739, leave to appeal to Court of Appeals denied 262 A.D. 847.) In the cited case the nominal form of the action was for a declaratory judgment but the substance of the action was the determination of title to tangible personalty. When the application for formal transfer by the Supreme Court was made that court held that the substance of the action was the only important question and the order of the Supreme Court for the transfer was made and was affirmed. ( Shea v. Shea, 261 A.D. 969, leave to appeal to Court of Appeals denied 261 A.D. 1079.) The substance both of the action in the Supreme Court and of the discovery here is the issue of ownership of the savings bank book and the fund represented thereby.

The institution of an action in the Supreme Court is not a basis for denial of the transfer. On the contrary, it is now settled law in this department that the Supreme Court of its own motion will refuse jurisdiction so as to concentrate the administration of estates in the Surrogate's Court. ( Matter of Ranft, 268 A.D. 136.)

The consent sought is granted. Submit, on notice, order accordingly.


Summaries of

Matter of Pollak

Surrogate's Court of the City of New York, New York County
Sep 18, 1944
183 Misc. 671 (N.Y. Misc. 1944)
Case details for

Matter of Pollak

Case Details

Full title:In the Matter of the Estate of BECKY POLLAK, Deceased. ALICE S. PETLUCK et…

Court:Surrogate's Court of the City of New York, New York County

Date published: Sep 18, 1944

Citations

183 Misc. 671 (N.Y. Misc. 1944)
53 N.Y.S.2d 544

Citing Cases

Vanderbilt v. Amer Assn

one over which it shall have exclusive jurisdiction which does not depend upon the monetary amount sought, to…

Smith v. Bowery Savings Bank

December 7, 1945. Present — Martin, P.J., Townley, Dore, Cohn and Wasservogel, JJ. [ 183 Misc. 671.] Judgment…