From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Katsh v. Katsh

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Jan 28, 1965
23 A.D.2d 494 (N.Y. App. Div. 1965)

Opinion

January 28, 1965


Order, entered on August 10, 1964, to the extent that it denies plaintiff's motion for summary judgment with respect to the first cause of action alleged in the complaint in Action No. 1, unanimously reversed, on the law, with $30 costs and disbursements to all parties filing briefs, payable from the estate of Joseph I. Katsh, deceased, and the motion granted. By agreement between plaintiff and his brother, since deceased, the latter undertook to make certain irrevocable testamentary provisions for the benefit of named sisters and nephews. Alleging that decedent's probated will violated the agreement, plaintiff brought action against the executors to enforce performance. The only objection to summary judgment which defendants assert in this court is that the sisters and nephews should have been joined as parties. Such joinder is not mandatory (CPLR 1004; Morgan v. Andreae, 295 N.Y. 723), nor in our judgment is it required by the circumstance that plaintiff is prosecuting other, unrelated, causes of action against the estate for his own benefit (cf. Elwyn v. Comeau, 8 Misc.2d 704, 708, affd. 5 A.D.2d 748). Settle order on notice.

Concur — Botein, P.J., Rabin, Valente, Stevens and Witmer, JJ.


Summaries of

Katsh v. Katsh

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Jan 28, 1965
23 A.D.2d 494 (N.Y. App. Div. 1965)
Case details for

Katsh v. Katsh

Case Details

Full title:CHAUNCEY J. KATSH, Appellant-Respondent, v. BEATRICE KATSH, Individually…

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department

Date published: Jan 28, 1965

Citations

23 A.D.2d 494 (N.Y. App. Div. 1965)

Citing Cases

Helman v. Dixon

Any procedural difficulties which may have existed under the language of section 210 of the former Civil…