TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

In re the Accounting of Sintyago

In the Matter of the Accounting of Vashti Sintyago, as Administratrix of the Estate of Canuto Sintyago

In re the Accounting of Sintyago, 198 Misc. 776 (N.Y. Sur. Ct. 1950)
Download
Format
Include

Star paging (*137) is kept for pin cites.

Court
New York Surrogate's Court · State Specialty Courts
Decided
October 26, 1950
Judges
Richardson
Citations
198 Misc. 776100 N.Y.S.2d 5561950 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 2157
Cited by 7 1 descriptions by later courts

Opinion of the Court — Richardson

Text extracted by OCR from a scanned original; check the original for exact wording.

Richardson, S.

The administratrix herein seeks approval of the compromise of two causes of action: one for personal injuries to, and another for the wrongful death of, the decedent; for the judicial settlement of her account; the fixation of compensation of her attorney for services rendered to the estate; and a determination of the proper distribution of the net amounts of recovery under the provisions of section 133 of the Decedent Estate Law, as amended by chapter 639 of the Laws of 1949, effective April 16, 1949.

The court finds the proposed compromise to be for the best interests of the estate and it will be approved. The compensation of the attorney of the administratrix for all services, including the entry of the decree herein and distribution as may be directed thereunder, is fixed in the percentages recommended by the special guardian for the infants and accepted by such attorney, to be charged proportionately against the respective amounts received in settlement.

The proceeds for personal injuries being assets of the estate will be distributed pursuant to subdivision 1 of section 83 of the Decedent Estate Law. The recovery for the wrongful death is distributable ‘ ‘ in proportion to the pecuniary injuries suf *778 fered ” by the decedent’s widow and next of kin pursuant to section 133 of the Decedent Estate Law, as amended, computed under the formula adopted by the court in Matter of Kaiser ( 198 Misc. 582 ).

The decedent died April 29, 1949, survived by his widow and three infant children, one of whom, a daughter, was married and not dependent on bim for her support and maintenance and not entitled to share in the amount received in settlement of the action for wrongful death. The decedent at his death was fifty-five years of age, his widow, thirty-seven, one son eighteen and another fourteen. According to the American Experience Table of Mortality decedent had an expectancy of fife of seventeen years, which is shorter than his widow’s expectancy. In such cases the husband’s expectancy is used (Matter of Uravic, 142 Misc. 775, 785 ). The probable period of dependency of the older son is three years and that of the younger son seven years. The aggregate years of dependency of all is twenty-seven and is used as the denominator and the numerator is the number of years of dependency of each beneficiary.

Accordingly, the pecuniary loss is determined to be as follows: the widow 62.9%, the older son 11.1% and the younger son 26%. The distribution of net proceeds, therefore, shall be so apportioned.

Proceed accordingly.

How later courts describe this case

Explanatory parentheticals written by citing courts — 1 in all; the most informative distinct ones are shown.

Cited by 7 cases

View all citing references →
1954: 11961: 11971: 21985: 11992: 11993: 119542026peak 1971 · 2

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. In re Estate of Flake484 N.E.2d 1243 (Ill. App. Ct. 1985)
  2. In re the Estate of Pridell206 Misc. 316 (N.Y. Sur. Ct. 1954)
  3. In re Acquafredda189 A.D.2d 504 (1993)
  4. In re the Estate of Feld153 Misc. 2d 615 (N.Y. Sur. Ct. 1992)
  5. In re the Estate of Robinson66 Misc. 2d 167 (N.Y. Sur. Ct. 1971)
  6. In re the Estate of Minetti65 Misc. 2d 1011 (N.Y. Sur. Ct. 1971)

Most recent

  1. In re Acquafredda189 A.D.2d 504 (1993)
  2. In re the Estate of Feld153 Misc. 2d 615 (N.Y. Sur. Ct. 1992)
  3. In re Estate of Flake484 N.E.2d 1243 (Ill. App. Ct. 1985)
  4. In re the Estate of Robinson66 Misc. 2d 167 (N.Y. Sur. Ct. 1971)
  5. In re the Estate of Minetti65 Misc. 2d 1011 (N.Y. Sur. Ct. 1971)
  6. In re the Estate of McNeil27 Misc. 2d 595 (N.Y. Sur. Ct. 1961)

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.

Authorities cited 2

DepthCaseCited by
In re the Accounting of Kaiser, 198 Misc. 582 (N.Y. Sur. Ct. 1950) 48
In re the Estate of Uravic, 142 Misc. 775 (N.Y. Sur. Ct. 1932) 23

Keyboard shortcuts

/Focus the search box
j kNext / previous result
EnterOpen the selected result
xAdd / remove the selected result from the download list
n pNext / previous search term in a case
cCopy the citation of the current case
+ −Larger / smaller reading text
?Show this list