Case Name: In re ABLOWICH
Court: New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 1907-04-05
Citations: 103 N.Y.S. 699
Docket Number: 
Parties: In re ABLOWICH.
Judges: 
Reporter: West's New York Supplement
Volume: 103
Pages: 699–704

Head Matter:
(118 App. Div. 626)
In re ABLOWICH.
(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department.
April 5, 1907.)
1. Administrators—Liability as Debtor of Estate.
When one accepted, letters of administration, he became chargeable with the amount in which the firm of which he was a member was indebted to the estate on notes and checks as that much money in his hands for the usual purposes of administration.
[Ed. Note.—For eases in point, see Cent Dig. vol. 22, Executors and Administrators, § 802.]
2. Same—Effect of Revocation of Letters.
An administrator was not released from liability to have his account charged with the amount in which the firm of which he was a member was indebted to the estate on notes and checks, because his letters were revoked before the estate was administered and he turned the notes and checks over to the successor, who accepted them.
Ingraham and McLaughlin, JJ., dissenting in part.
Appeal from Surrogate’s Court, New York County.
In the matter of the account of Julius Ablowich, as original administrator of Harris Ablowich, deceased. From the decree settling same, Emanuel Blumenstiel, substituted administrator, appeals. Reversed and remitted.
Argued, before PATTERSON, P. J., and McRAUGHRIN, IN-GRAHAM, HOUGHTON, and SCOTT, JJ.
S. Livingston Samuels, for appellant.
Arthur Furber, for respondent.

Opinion:
PATTERSON, P. J.
I concur in the view, expressed -by Mr. Justice INGRAHAM:
"That when the accounting administrator in this proceeding accepted the letters of administration issued to him, he was chargeable with the amount of that indebtedness represented by the notes and checks of the firm of which he was a member, as so much money in his hands for the usual purposes of administration."
I do not, however, concur in the view that when the letters of Julius Ablowich were revoked before the estate was administered, and he turned the notes and obligations of his firm over to his successor as administrator, and those evidences of debt were accepted by. such successor, that thereby Julius Albowich ceased to be chargeable with the amount of the indebtedness of his firm to the estate. If by reason of his appointment as administrator he became chargeable with the amount of the various obligations of his firm, that was a situation in which he was placed by the law. He could not discharge himself from it by turning over the evidences of his own indebtedness to his successor; nor could his successor discharge him by the acceptance of such evidence of indebtedness. If, by his becoming administrator, the debt of Julius Ablowich to the estate is to be regarded as assets in his hands, he must be charged with such assets in his account, and can only be discharged in the manner provided by law. It seems to me that this is not a case in which the doctrine of the election of inconsistent remedies-by the present administrator applies.
I think the decree of the surrogate, confirming the report of the referee, overruling the objections to the account of Julius Ablowich, should be reversed, with costs, and the proceeding remitted for further action.
HOUGHTON and SCOTT, JJ., concur.