Case ID: thomp-cook_4/html/0682-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Talcott, J.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Disbrow v. Mills, appellant.
    Deposits— special funds in hands of surrogate—intermingling special deposits.
    
    A surrogate received from Ms predecessors $7,267.89 as balance of funds in such predecessor’s hands as surrogate. Included in this fund as a part thereof,' was $2,653.19 belonging to plaintiff. The surrogate made no inquiry or attempt to ascertain to whom the several sums comprised in the $7,267.-89 belonged, but paid therefrom various claims other than plaintiff presented, until the sum in his hands was reduced to $1,400. Meld, that such surrogate was liable to plaintiff for the whole of the $2,653.19. The deposit by the surrogate’s predecessor of the funds belonging to plaintiff indiscriminately with other funds, did not impair the title of the plaintiff to such fund. Van Alen v. Am. Nat. Bank, 52 N. Y. 1; Hilt, on Trustees, 164.
    _ ' Appeal from a judgment in favor of plaintiff entered upon-the report of a referee. The action was brought in Westchester county by Bethia E. Disbrow against John W. Mills, surrogate of said county, to recover moneys deposited in his hands and belonging to plaintiff.
    
      Marshall & Ver planch and Robert Cochran, for appellant.
    
      Stanley & Brown, for respondent.
   Talcott, J.

The head-note states the only material point in the opinion.

Judgment affirmed.