Marek's Estate, In re
| Decision Date | 22 February 1962 |
| Citation | 226 N.Y.S.2d 444,11 N.Y.2d 740,181 N.E.2d 456 |
| Parties | , 181 N.E.2d 456 In re MAREK'S ESTATE. Application of Julia IOANNOU for leave to withdraw funds deposited with the Treasurer of the City of New York for the benefit of Viktoria Miculka in the Estate of Alexander Marek, Deceased. Julia Ioannou, Appellant, The People, etc., and John T. Meehan, as Public Administrator of the County of Bronx, Respondents. |
| Court | New York Court of Appeals Court of Appeals |
Appeal from Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department, 13 A.D.2d 917, 217 N.Y.S.2d 1010.
The petitioner made an application for leave to withdraw funds deposited with the Treasurer of the State of New York for the benefit of the petitioner's assignor in the estate of the deceased. The funds had been deposited under the terms of a decree which determined that the petitioner's assignor was a distributee of the deceased. The decree also determined that since the petitioner's assignor resided in Czechoslovakia and since it appeared that it was improbable that she would have the beneficial use and enjoyment of the money, to which she was entitled, her distributive share should be deposited with the Treasurer of the City of New York subject to further order of court.
The Surrogate's Court of Bronx County, Christopher C. McGrath, S., rendered an order dismissing the petition, and the petitioner appealed.
The Appellate Division, 13 A.D.2d 917, 217 N.Y.S.2d 1010, affirmed the order without opinion.
The Appellate Division, 14 A.D.2d 671, 219 N.Y.S.2d 942, denied a motion for leave to appeal to the Court of Appeals.
The petitioner appealed to the Court of Appeals, contending that Section 269 of the Surrogate's Court Act did not prohibit the donation involved in the proceeding nor the release of the fund from the office of the Treasurer of the City of New York, and that if Section 269 is construed to inhibit any voluntary gift of the beneficiary's interest, even though not subject to confiscation by a foreign government, it is unconstitutional and void.
Sydney J. Schwartz, New York City, for petitioner.
Louis J. Lefkowitz, Atty. Gen. , for respondent.
Order affirmed, with costs to all parties appearing separately and filing separate briefs payable out of the fund.
All concur.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Bjarsch v. DiFalco
... ... The estate is presently subject to supervision of the New York County Surrogate's Court. This suit, against the two Surrogates of that county named as the ... ...
-
Draganoff's Estate, In re
...269-a have been applied generally to protect the interests of nationals of the 'Iron Curtain' countries (see Matter of Marek, 11 N.Y.2d 740, 226 N.Y.S.2d 444, 181 N.E.2d 456 [1962], appeal dismissed for want of a substantial federal question sub nom. Ioannou v. New York, 371 U.S. 30, 83 S.C......
-
Leikind's Estate, In re
...rulings of this court sustaining the constitutionality of the statutes which preceded the present one (Matter of Marek's Estate, 11 N.Y.2d 740, 226 N.Y.S.2d 444, 181 N.E.2d 456, app. dsmd. sub nom. Ioannou v. New York, 371 U.S. 30, 83 S.Ct. 6, 9 L.Ed.2d 5 (for want of a substantial Federal ......
-
Goldstein v. Cox
... ... It contains few facts. As to plaintiff Goldstein, it says only: ... "The Surrogate, in the judicial settlement in the Estate of Maurice Siegel, wherein the rights of plaintiff, Anghel Goldstein are involved, decreed: ... `Ordered, Adjudged and Decreed that the distributive ... ...