Case Name: In the Matter of the Judicial Settlement of the Accounts of Ewen McIntyre, Testamentary Trustee of the Trust Created by the Last Will and Testament of Thomas C. Chalmers, M. D., Deceased. Ewen McIntyre, Testamentary Trustee, etc., Appellant; Anna C. Holbrook and Others, Respondents
Court: New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 1897-12
Citations: 24 A.D. 167
Docket Number: 
Parties: In the Matter of the Judicial Settlement of the Accounts of Ewen McIntyre, Testamentary Trustee of the Trust Created by the Last Will and Testament of Thomas C. Chalmers, M. D., Deceased. Ewen McIntyre, Testamentary Trustee, etc., Appellant; Anna C. Holbrook and Others, Respondents.
Judges: 
Reporter: Appellate Division Reports
Volume: 24
Pages: 167–172

Head Matter:
In the Matter of the Judicial Settlement of the Accounts of Ewen McIntyre, Testamentary Trustee of the Trust Created by the Last Will and Testament of Thomas C. Chalmers, M. D., Deceased. Ewen McIntyre, Testamentary Trustee, etc., Appellant; Anna C. Holbrook and Others, Respondents.
When a trustee is liable for not collecting rent—failure to eject a tenant in default— excused where the premises would probably hare stood empty.
A trustee appointed under a will, by the terms of which he was authorized to manage the real estate of the testator in such a manner as he should deem best for the uses and purposes in the will mentioned and with all the powers and discretion in those respects which the testator had and possessed, is chargeable, upon his accounting, with a balance of uncollected rent upon a parcel of the real estate embraced in the trust, which he allowed to accrue during a period of four years without trying to collect it by proceedings at law from the tenant and without ejecting her, although the premises, if vacant, could probably have been rented ; but the trustee is not chargeable with a similar deficiency, arising in regard to another parcel of the trust estate, which was situated in a neighborhood where there was considerable vacant property and where the ejection of the tenant would probably have resulted in leaving the premises tenantless, and in imposing upon the trust fund expenses necessary for their care.
Patterson, J., dissented as to the latter proposition.
Appeal by Ewen McIntyre, as testamentary trustee, etc., of Thomas 0. Chalmers, M. D., deceased, from portions of a decree of the Surrogate’s Court of the county of Mew York, entered in said Surrogate’s Court on the 12th day of May, 1897, settling the accounts of said trustee.
Howard Van Sinderen, for the trustee.
Frank Walling, for the respondents.

Opinion:
Ingraham, J.:
We concur with Mr. Justice Patterson as to the liability of the trustee for the rents uncollected on the premises No. 25 West Seventeenth street in the city of Mew York; but upon the whole case, we do not think that the referee was justified in charging the trustee with the uncollected rent of the premises No. 58 Walker street in said city. During the time that this rent which was not collected accrued there seems to have been but little demand for property in Walker street. A considerable portion of the property in the neighborhood was vacant, and the tenants in possession of the property had, prior to the time that the rent fell into arrears, paid their rent promptly. The tenants kept a restaurant upon the leased premises, and whether or not, under the circumstances, it was to the advantage of the estate to dispossess the tenants and leave the property on the hands of the trustee, with the possibility that the incidental expenses necessary would be imposed upon the estate for its protection and preservation, or to allow the tenants to remain in possession with the hope of being able to collect something from them was a question for the trustee to determine. From the testimony we cannot say that this determination was even an error of judgment, much less such negligence as would justify the court upon the settlement of his accounts in charging him with the amount of rent uncollected because he had not dispossessed these tenants or had obtained a judgment against them and sold their property upon execution. From the evidence we should be inclined to think that the result would have been that the property would be vacant, and the trustee would thus be compelled to have incurred the expense of caring for it. It is true that after a receiver of the property was appointed he managed to collect rent from these tenants, but this amount was comparatively small; and, upon his dispossessing the tenants, he was unable to rent the property, and it remained vacant. When two courses were open to the trustee, and he had to determine which one to be followed was for the best interest of the estate, a mere error of judgment is not sufficient to impose upon him any liability ; and, from the testimony, it certainly does not appear that, if he had decided to adopt a course other than that which he did adopt, the estate would have been in any substantial manner benefited.
As stated by Mr. Justice Patterson, the circumstances as to the Seventeenth street accounts were different. He allowed the tenant of that house to remain in possession for upwards of a year, without paying any rent, until the tenant died, and then left the possession of the property with her son, who retained it until October without paying any rent; if he had dispossessed him, he would have had no difficulty in getting another tenant.
We think, therefore, that the decree of the surrogate should be modified by striking out the charge against the trustee of the amount of the rent of the premises in Walker street, and, as so modified, affirmed, the costs of the trustee to he paid out of the estate.
Van Brunt, P. J., Williams and O'Brien, JJ., concurred; Patterson, J., dissented