Opinion · Nylaw New York

MATTER OF CLINE, 283 App. Div. 1011 (1954)

In the Matter of Ancillary Appointment of a Foreign Comm. of theEstate of GENEVIEVE R. CLINE, an Incompetent Person.MARY A. STRINGHAM, Appellant; MARION P. THOMPSON, Respondent., 283 A.D. 1011 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department. 1954)

Type: Opinion
Court: New York
Jurisdiction: New York
Date: 1954-06-01
Topic: general

MATTER OF CLINE, 283 App. Div. 1011 (1954) In the Matter of the Ancillary Appointment of a Foreign Committee of theEstate of GENEVIEVE R. CLINE, an Incompetent Person.MARY A. STRINGHAM, Appellant; MARION P. THOMPSON, Respondent.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department.

Citator

UpLaw has not yet analyzed MATTER OF CLINE, 283 App. Div. 1011 (1954). The absence of a flag is not a finding that it is good law.

MATTER OF CLINE,283 App. Div. 1011(1954)

In the Matter of the Ancillary Appointment of a Foreign Committee of the

Estate of GENEVIEVE R. CLINE, an Incompetent Person.

MARY A. STRINGHAM, Appellant; MARION P. THOMPSON, Respondent.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department.

June 1, 1954.

Appeal from Supreme Court, New York County.

Per Curiam.

We are constrained to agree with the report of the learned Referee, confirmed by Special Term, finding that incompetent is a resident of the State of New York. The present issue has arisen on the question of whether the incompetent resides without the State so that the committee appointed in Ohio might be named ancillary committee of the property of the incompetent within this State pursuant to section 1363 of the Civil Practice Act. Failing a showing of such residence without the State, the foreign committee may not claim appointment as an ancillary committee (Matter of McHie,233 App. Div. 388, affd.258 N.Y. 589).

Petitioner may still successfully apply here for the appointment of herself as committee of the incompetent under section 1359 of the Civil Practice Act (Matter of De Teplow, 88 N.Y.S.2d 215).

The order appealed from should be affirmed, with costs.

Peck, P.J., Dore, Callahan, Breitel and Bergan, JJ., concur.

Order unanimously affirmed, with $20 costs and disbursements to the respondent.