New York Supreme Court, 1890

In re Lasak's Estate

New York Supreme Court · Decided February 12, 1890 · Pratt

8 N.Y.S. 740; 30 N.Y. St. Rep. 356; 55 Hun 610; 1890 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 1749 (New York Supplement)

Counsel

Charles F. MacLean, for appellant Ives. Donohue, Newcombe & Cardozo, (Stephen C. Baldwin, of counsel,) for appellants Cordelia W. and Albert Chauvet. R. E. Robinson, for respondent the New York Life Ins. & T. Co. George G. Reynolds, for respondent Victoria A. McKenzie. Edward T. Bartlett, for respondent American Female Guardian Soc. & Home for the Friendless. Frederick B. Van Vorst, for respondent Children’s Aid Soc. Edgar M. Johnson, for respondents Ophelia J. Cuthbert and others.

Opinion of the Court

Pratt, J.

The appointment by the surrogate of the New York Life & Trust Company was eminently wise, and should be affirmed. The careful opinion rendered by the surrogate renders any extended discussion unnecessary. The purpose of the statute in preferring a residuary legatee as administrator is obviously because such person will ordinarily be interested in an economical administration of the estate; and when the residuary legatee is a minor the same reasons suggest the appointment be given to the guardian as provided by the statute. Order affirmed. All concur.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.