Case Name: Matter of the Appraisal of the Estate of George Smith, Deceased, Under the Act in Relation to Taxable Transfers of Property
Court: New York Surrogate's Court
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 1909-12
Citations: 7 Mills Surr. 333
Docket Number: 
Parties: Matter of the Appraisal of the Estate of George Smith, Deceased, Under the Act in Relation to Taxable Transfers of Property.
Judges: 
Reporter: Mills' Surrogate's Reports
Volume: 7
Pages: 333–334

Head Matter:
Matter of the Appraisal of the Estate of George Smith, Deceased, Under the Act in Relation to Taxable Transfers of Property.
(Surrogates Court, Kings County,
December, 1909.)
Surrogates’ Courts—Procedure and review—Orders and decrees— Opening, vacating and correcting—Procedure to open or set aside DECREES—How INSTITUTED.
Proceedings to reopen or vacate decrees of a Surrogate’s Court may be instituted by an order to show cause or notice of motion and the issuance and the publication of a citation are not required, though the executor is a resident of a foreign jurisdiction.
Application to reopen a decree assessing a transfer tax. . f
Daniel Seymour, for State Comptroller; Henry W. Jessup, specially appearing for respondent.

Opinion:
Thomas, S.
The only question presented, or which can. properly be considered upon this appeal, is as to whether the executor of the decedent now moving was properly brought before the 'court by an order to show cause served upon him by mail, he being a resident of a foreign jurisdiction, instead of by a citation issued and published in the form required to initiate the proceedings in this court that are required by law to be so commenced. It has for many years been the practice in this court to initiate proceedings in this court for the reopening or vacating of decrees by order to show cause or notice of motion; and, since the decision of Mr. Surrogate Rollins in Cluff v. Tower, 3 D'em. 253, the propriety of this procedure must be considered as finally settled. The practice in the Supreme Court is the same. Oluff v. Tower, supra; Furman v. Furman, 153 H. T. 309; Code Civ. Pro., § 1282-, 1283.
Application denied.