Case ID: misc_29/html/0722-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Vabnum, S.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Matter of the Estate of Jules H. Lowenstein, Deceased.
    (Surrogate’s Court, New York County,
    December, 1899.)
    Administration — Relatives, not entitled to share, administer before the public administrator — Code Civ. Pro., §§ 3660, 3663.
    The rule of the Revised Statutes that relatives of an intestate, although not entitled to share in his personalty, are entitled to administer upon it in preference to the public administrator, has not been changed by section 2660 of the Code of Civil Procedure as amended in 1893, and such relatives must, under, section 2663 of said Code, be cited to an application for the appointment of an administrator.
    Application for letters of administration.
    Weed, Henry & Meyers, for petitioner.
    No other appearance.
   Vabnum, S.

The Revised Statutes, as they stood at the time of the amendment of section 2660 of the Code of Civil Procedure, by chapter 686 of the Laws of 1893, authorized the issuing of letters of administration to relatives or kin of an intestate, although they were not entitled to share in the distribution of his estate, and this in preference to the public administrator, where the application for the appointment was made in pursuance of the procedure prescribed in article 4, title 3, chapter 18 of the Code of Civil Procedure. 4 R. S. (8th ed.) pt. 2, chap. 6, tit. 2, art. 3, § 27; Butler v. Perrott, 1 Dem. 9; Lathrop v. Smith, 24 N. Y. 420; Matter of Brewster, 5 Dem. 261. In incorporating into section 2660 of the Code the provisions of the Revised Statutes referred to, a slight change was made in the language indicating the order in which the relatives or next of kin of an intestate are entitled to letters of administration upon his estate, and this, it is claimed, is evidence of an intention on the part of the Legislature to change the previous law and to limit the issuance of letters under subdivision 8 of section 2660 to the kin of the decedent who have a present and immediate right to share in the distribution of his estate. A similar claim was made in Matter of Wilson, 92 Hun, 318, where it was sought to prevent the widow of an intestate from obtaining letters of administration upon his estate, upon the ground that she was precluded by an agreement made with him from succeeding to or sharing in his 'personal property, and so, under the section of the Code under consideration, not entitled to letters of administration upon his estate. It was held that, assuming the effect of the agreement to be as claimed, she was, nevertheless, entitled to the letters. The reasoning of the court and the effect of its decision show that it was considered that no alteration had been made in the law by the Code, and that Lathrop v. Smith, supra, is still effective as an authority upon the question now under consideration. See, also, Estate of Sophie Moehring, 24 Misc. Rep. 418; Sur. Decs. 1898, p. 402; Estate of Caroline Haug, 29 Misc. Rep. 36; Sur. Decs. 1899, p. 503. In the present case the application is made by petition, under section 2662 of the Code of' Civil Procedure to appoint the public administrator the administrator of the decedent without citing the uncles and aunts and other relatives of the intestate. These, although none of them is entitled to share in the intestate’s estate, are, in view of what I consider to be the effect of the present provisions of the law upon the subject, persons who, under subdivision 8 of said section 2660, have a right to the letters superior to that of the public administrator and should be cited. Code Civ. Proc., § 2663; Butler v. Perrott, supra.

Decreed accordingly.