History
  • No items yet
midpage
Marston v. Paulding
10 Paige Ch. 40
New York Court of Chancery
1842
Check Treatment
The Chancellor.

It is not necessary to examine the question whether the property in controversy in this case was or was not rightfully retained by the respondents as a part of the estate belonging to the decedent. For if it belonged to the appellant, his proper remedy was in a different forum. For the surrogate has no jurisdiction, upon a summary application to him, to compel the administrators to deliver over property to the owner thereof, which property has been taken possession of by them as a part of the estate to be administered by them; although their claim to such property is wholly unfounded, or is merely colorable.

Order appealed from affirmed with costs.

Case Details

Case Name: Marston v. Paulding
Court Name: New York Court of Chancery
Date Published: Oct 31, 1842
Citation: 10 Paige Ch. 40
AI-generated responses must be verified and are not legal advice.
Your Notebook is empty. To add cases, bookmark them from your search, or select Add Cases to extract citations from a PDF or a block of text.