In re Oraindi's Estate
Headnotes
Summary
Syllabus and headnotes are prepared by the reporter or publisher, not the court, and are not part of the opinion.
Opinion of the Court
Text extracted by OCR from a scanned original; check the original for exact wording.
Pratt, J.
This appeal was from an intermediate order made by the surrogate of Kings county having regard to the safety of the fund of the above-named estate pending an investigation. The order was clearly within the discretion of the surrogate, and therefore no appeal would lie. No right of the attorney was impaired by the order, as it only provided for the safe custody of the estate while the claims of the creditors and the attorney could be properly adjusted. It is clear the surrogate had jurisdiction of the subject-matter, and the order was discretionary. This suggestion answers the appeal, and renders further comment unnecessary. Order affirmed, with costs.
How later courts describe this case
No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.
Cited by 2 cases
View all citing references →Relies on it most ⓘ
Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.