Court Opinion

ID: 3632107
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2016-07-06 00:11:20.16125+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:45:36.306360
License: Public Domain

I concur with O'BRIEN, J., for affirmance. I think the Surrogate's Court acquired jurisdiction *Page 575 
of the proceedings for the judicial settlement of the accounts of the administrator and that the decree made therein is binding upon the administrator and all the persons cited, served and appearing upon the hearing; and that, under the provisions of the Code, but one final decree of distribution of the funds in the hands of the administrator is contemplated or provided for. I am further of the opinion that the surrogate adopted the correct practice in holding that the petitioner, not having been made a party to the proceeding and not having appeared therein, has the right, upon his application, to have the decree opened and then heard upon his claim to be the next of kin and entitled to share in the distribution of the estate.
PARKER, Ch. J., VANN and CULLEN, JJ., concur with BARTLETT, J.; O'BRIEN and HAIGHT, JJ., read dissenting opinions; WERNER, J., concurs with O'BRIEN, J.
Order reversed, etc.