Snedeker v. Snedeker

• Citation: 164 N.Y. 58,58 N.E. 4
• Parties: SNEDEKER v. SNEDEKER.
• Decision Date: 02 October 1900
• Court: New York Court of Appeals Court of Appeals

164 N.Y. 58

58 N.E. 4

SNEDEKER

v.SNEDEKER.

Court of Appeals of New York.

Oct. 2, 1900.

Appeal from supreme court, appellate division, Second department.

Proceedings by Thomas H. Snedeker against Ada May Snedeker, as administratrix of Charles Snedeker, for an accounting. From a judgment of the appellate division affirming an order of the surrogate's court in favor of plaintiff (63 N. Y. Supp. 580), defendant appeals. Affirmed.

Charles M. Stafford, for appellant.

A. T. Payne, for respondent.

BARTLETT, J.

The appellant in this proceeding brought an action under section 1902 of the Code of Civil Procedure against one George Malcolm to recover damages for the death of her husband, Charles Snedeker, caused by the negligent act of the defendant. She recovered a judgment, entered upon the verdict of a jury for $5,000, aggregating $5,771.95, damages and costs. The deceased left no children. The father of the deceased, Thomas H. Snedeker, instituted this proceeding in the surrogate's court of Kings county by petition to compel the widow, as administratrix, to render an account of her proceedings in respect to said judgment, and pay over to him the distributive share thereof to which he claimed to be entitled. After hearing the parties, an order was entered in the surrogate's court granting the prayer of the petition, directing an accounting, and a deduction of the expenses of the action in which the judgment was recovered, together with the commissions of the administratrix. The appellate division affirmed the order, and appeal was taken to this court. The widow claims that the action in which the judgment was recovered is statutory, and unknown to the common law, the recovery no part of decedent's estate, and she is entitled to the entire amount realized. The father of the deceased insists that, as his son left no children, he is entitled to share with the widow the net proceeds of the judgment.

The adjustment of these conflicting claims depends on the construction to be given the sections of the Code of Civil Procedure governing the action instituted by the administratrix. Section 1902 allows the action to be brought by ‘the executor or administrator of a decedent, who has left, him or her surviving, a husband, wife, or next of kin.’ Section 1903 reads as follows: ‘The damages recovered in an action, brought as provided in the last section, are exclusively for the benefit of the decedent's husband, or wife, and next of kin; and when they are collected, they must be distributed by the plaintiff, as if they were unbequeathed assets, left in his hands, after payment of all debts, and expenses of administration. But the plaintiff may deduct therefrom the expenses of the action, and his commissions upon the residue; which must be allowed by the surrogate, upon notice, given in such a manner and to such persons, as the surrogate deems proper.’ Section 1904 provides, in part, that ‘the damages awarded to the plaintiff may be such a sum as the jury, * * * the court or the referee deems to be a fair and just compensation for the pecuniary injuries, resulting from the decedent's death, to the person or persons, for whose benefit the action is brought.’ Section 1905 provides: ‘The term ‘next of kin’ as used in the foregoing sections, has the meaning specified in section 1870 of this act.' Section 1870 reads: ‘The term ‘next of kin’ as used in this title, includes all those entitled, under the provisions of law relating to the distribution of personal property, to share in the unbequeathed assets of a decedent, after payment of debts and expenses, other than a surviving husband or wife.' The provisions of law relating to the distribution of personal property as applicable to this case are found in subdivision 7 of section 2732 of the Code of Civil Procedure. This subdivision, where there are no children, divides the surplus between the widow and the father. The action thus provided for is purely statutory, has existed in this state for many years substantially as now found in the Code, and has been repeatedly considered by the courts. The general scheme of the action may be briefly stated as follows: An executor or administrator can sue only where decedent leaves husband, wife, or next of kin. When...