In re the Application for Letters of Administration on the Goods, Chattels, & Credits of Gilchrist

Majority

p. 543

Matter of the Application for Letters of Administration on the Goods, Chattels, and Credits of James A. Gilchrist, Deceased.

(Surrogate’s Court, Kings County,

March, 1902.)

Headnote

Administration—; Public administrator of Kings county preferred to brother — Code C. P. § 2669.

In Kings county the public administrator is by statute preferred in administration to the brother of a decedent, who left a father in

p. 544

Ireland but no wife, issue or descendants, and this because the brother, not being entitled to a distributive share in the estate, cannot be entitled to administration.

Application by a brother of deceased, residing in this country, praying that letters issued to the public administrator herein be revoked, and that letters of administration be issued to him as a blood relative of deceased.

Henry Cooper, for petitioner.

Frederick H. Chase, for William B'. Davenport, public administrator.

The deceased in this case left a father, residing in Ireland, and who is of full age, but no wife, children, or children’s children.

Letters of administration were issued to the public administra- ' tor. The petitioner herein, a brother, residing in this county, prays that such letters be revoked, and that letters of administration be issued to him as a blood relative of the deceased.

Section 2669 of the Code distinctly provides that the public administrator shall have prior right if there is no next of kin entitled to a distributive share of the estate, who are competent and willing to serve. The petitioner herein, not being entitled to a distributive share of his brother’s estate has, therefore, no rights herein as against the public administrator.

The cases quoted by the petitioner herein evidently relate to the public administrator in Hew York county, where the statute is different, and which have, no doubt, misled him into making this application. There is certainly no good and sufficient reason why a different rule should be applied by the Legislature in favor of a public administrator in this county, differing from that of Hew York county, and there is no good, practical reason why a public official should be preferred to a blood relative in the administration of the affairs of a decedent’s estate, but the statute upon this matter is express, and I am constrained to follow the same, and the remedy should be with the Legislature, and not with the court.

The motion is, therefore, denied.

Motion denied.