From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

In re Ryan

Court of Errors and Appeals
Oct 4, 1946
49 A.2d 40 (N.J. 1946)

Opinion

Argued May 24th, 1946.

Decided October 4th, 1946.

There having been little difficulty in the administration of the estate, the allowance to the executor of $5,399.47 on a corpus of $153,911.85, or three and one-half per cent., reduced to $3,500, or about two and one-half per cent. Proctor's fee of $4,500 reduced to $3,500.

On appeal from the Prerogative Court.

Messrs. Wall, Haight, Carey Hartpence ( Mr. Joseph A. Davis, of counsel), for the appellants.

Messrs. Congleton McLaughlin ( Mr. Frederick J. Waltzinger, of counsel), for the respondents.


This is an appeal from those portions of the decree of the Prerogative Court affirming allowances of executor's commissions of $5,399.47 on a corpus amounting to $153,911.85 and proctors' fees of $4,500 made in the Essex County Orphans Court.

The estate consisted largely of cash and stock in a company in which the testator was the president and which was held by him subject to an agreement with the other stockholders for its sale either to the survivors or to the company, at book value. Three months after the executor qualified it received the sale price for this stock.

An examination of the facts discloses little difficulty in the administration of the estate. As said by the Vice-Ordinary, it was "in general a simple matter * * *." The allowance made to the executor was a corpus commission of three and one-half per cent. whereas the legislature has fixed five per cent. as the maximum rate even for the most difficult administration where the corpus receipts exceed $50,000. R.S. 3:11-2.

We conclude that commissions of $3,500, or slightly less than two and one-half per cent. of corpus, will amply compensate the executor for the pain, trouble and risk involved in settling this estate ( R.S. 3:11-1), and that a counsel fee of $3,500 to the proctors is reasonable compensation for the legal services rendered.

Let the decree be modified in accordance with this opinion.

For affirmance — DONGES, WELLS, RAFFERTY, JJ. 3.

For modification — THE CHIEF-JUSTICE, PARKER, BODINE, HEHER, PERSKIE, OLIPHANT, DILL, FREUND, McGEEHAN, JJ. 9.


Summaries of

In re Ryan

Court of Errors and Appeals
Oct 4, 1946
49 A.2d 40 (N.J. 1946)
Case details for

In re Ryan

Case Details

Full title:In the matter of the estate of CHARLES E. RYAN, deceased

Court:Court of Errors and Appeals

Date published: Oct 4, 1946

Citations

49 A.2d 40 (N.J. 1946)
49 A.2d 40

Citing Cases

In re Pfizer

Commissions totalling three per cent are ample. Cf. In re Bristle, 138 N.J. Eq. 476 ( E. A. 1946); In re…

In re the Estate of Cox

An allowance for that period at one-fifth of one per cent a year, would be about 3 1/2%. Assume that the…