Study aid, not legal advice. caselaw is not a law firm and does not provide legal advice or engage in the unauthorized practice of law (UPL). All briefs, outlines, and citation tools on these pages are educational summaries for law students; they are not a substitute for advice from a licensed attorney admitted in your jurisdiction. Bar-admission rules vary by state. For court filings or client matters, verify every authority against the official reporter and your court's local rules. Use of caselaw does not create an attorney-client relationship.
In the Matter of the Accounting of Peter Rose, as Executor of Philip B. Rose, Deceased, Appellant. Catherine M. Rose et al., Respondents, 1903 — 176 N.Y. 587 · caselaw · US
General
In the Matter of the Accounting of Peter Rose, as Executor of Philip B. Rose, Deceased, Appellant. Catherine M. Rose et al., Respondents
176 N.Y. 587·New York Court of Appeals·1903·NY
Brief incoming
Hand-reviewed Bluebook brief (procedural posture, facts, issue, holding, reasoning, dissent) ships once the AI generation pipeline runs through this case. Join the waitlist to get notified when 1L briefs go live.
Opinion
In the Matter of the Accounting of Peter Rose, as Executor of Philip B. Rose, Deceased, Appellant. Catherine M. Rose et al., Respondents.
Matter of Bose, 75 App. Div. 615, affirmed.
(Submitted October 22, 1903;
decided November 10, 1903.)
Appeal from an order of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the third judicial department, entered July 17, 1902, which affirmed a decree of the Rensselaer County Surrogate’s Court surcharging the account of Peter Rose, as executor of Philip B. Rose, deceased.
J. A. Cipperhj for appellant.
Clarence W. Betts for respondents.
[MAJORITY]
Order affirmed, with costs; no opinion.
Concur: Parker, Ch. J., Gray, Haight, Martin, Vann, Cullen and Werner, JJ.