Case Name: In the matter of the estate of Sarah A. Cooke, deceased
Court: New Jersey Prerogative Court
Jurisdiction: New Jersey
Decision Date: 1924-06-30
Citations: 96 N.J. Eq. 587
Docket Number: 
Parties: In the matter of the estate of Sarah A. Cooke, deceased.
Judges: 
Reporter: New Jersey Equity Reports
Volume: 96
Pages: 587–588

Head Matter:
Edwin Robert Walker, Ordinary.
Edmund B. Leaming, Vivian M. Lewis, John H. Backes, John Grieein, John E. Foster, Malcolm G. Buchanan, James F. Fielder, Alonzo Church, Robert H. Ingersoll and John Bentley, Vice-Ordinaries.
In the matter of the estate of Sarah A. Cooke, deceased.
[Decided June 30th, 1924.]
1. Matters substantially included in an appeal pending in the prerogative court from a decree of an orphans court are out of the orphans court’s jurisdiction.
2. Where an appeal is taken to the prerogative court, all future proceedings in the execution of the trust, when not involved in the appeal, must be presented in the orphans court.
On appeal from an order of the orphans court of the county of Passaic, signed by Mr. Justice Mintum, who> filed the following memorandum:
“The question involved in this application is net a question of power, but whether the matter presented is substantially included in the appeal now pending in the prerogative court from the decree of this court allowing the final accounts. I so consider it, and the contention therefore urged before me is out of this court’s jurisdiction'. Nothing can be lost to the estate by awaiting the determination of the prerogative court, since the permanent situs of the former trustee in this jurisdiction subjects it with certainty to compliance with any decree which may be made against it; and no question is now made as to the solvency and financial ability of such trustee to respond to the requirements of any decree which the prerogative court may make.
“This court intervened in this matter only for the purpose of supplying the estate with a new trustee in view of the expressed desire of the former trustee to resign from the further execution of the trust, and the desire of the present trustees, who are residuary legatees, to assume its obligations. That. situation having been dealt with by the former order entered herein appointing the present trustees, all future proceedings which the present trustees may deem necessary to the proper execution of their trust, when not involved in the pending appeal, must be presented to the judge of the orphans court.
“The order to show cause will therefore'be discharged, without costs.”
Mr. Edward Beam, Mr. John G. Beam and Mr. William B. Beam, proctors pro se, for the appellants.
Mr. John L. Griggs, proctor for the respondent.

Opinion:
Griffin, Vice-Ordinary.
The order appealed from will be affirmed, for the reasons stated in the memorandum of Mr. Justice Mintum in the Passaic orphans court.