Majority
Headnote
Surrogate’s Court — a copy of the stenographer’s minutes, when to be paid for out of the estate.There was a contest in the Surrogate’s Court of Erie county over the probate of the will of Henry H. Byron, deceased. A decree was entered on the 10th day of September, 1890, admitting the will to probate. It was directed by the decree that the question of costs be reserved to be determined by the further decree of the Surrogate’s Court. A motion was thereafter made by the contestants to be allowed as disbursements the sum of $456.80 paid for a copy of the stenographer’s minutes of the evidence taken upon the trial.
They presented, upon the motion, affidavits showing that by direction of their counsel they procured of the official stenographer of the Surrogate’s Court a copy of the minutes of the testimony, and that Byron paid the sum named therefor. No order was obtained, prior to the furnishing of the minutes, directing them to be furnished to the contestants. The proponents opposed the motion, and their affidavits show that they had procured a part of the stenographer’s minutes for use upon the trial at an expense of $332, and had them at the time the contestants procured their copy.
This appeal is upon a question of law, and not from a decree rendered upon the trial by the Surrogate of an issue of fact, and the
The contestants having been unsuccessful in the litigation were not entitled to any costs. They were not entitled, at the expense of the estate, to reimbursement for moneys they may have paid for minutes of testimony without an order of the Surrogate’s Court. That court being one of limited jurisdiction, its power to grant the order was derived from the section of the Code mentioned, and that section, it will be seen, contemplates that the application for the order shall precede the furnishing of the minutes. The proponents were entitled to notice of such application. (In the Matter of the Probate of the Will of Budlong, Deceased, 33 Hun, 235 .) Had the application been made before the minutes were furnished, it would have been made to appear to the Surrogate that his official stenographer had already furnished a copy of most of the testimony to the proponents, for which he had charged them the sum of $332. An investigation would have, undoubtedly, shown that the stenographer, when he made the tcopy for the appellants, took a duplicate impression and had on hand an extra copy of the evidence. It would have afforded the appellants an opportunity to loan to the contestants their copy of the evidence, and thereby save the expense of another copy.
This case very aptly illustrates the propriety of the provision of the Code requiring that the application for the order should precede the furnishing of the minutes. The course pursued gave to the stenographer an opportunity to secure $456.80 for an exceedingly small outlay on his part. If properly regulated, the services of a stenographer probably facilitate the business of our courts. They, at least, conduce to correctness, but, unless a careful supervision is exercised over them by the courts, their charges become exceedingly burdensome to the litigants.
That part of the supplementary decree directing the executors to pay the contestants out of the funds of the estate the amount paid to the stenographer should be reversed, with costs.
Dwight, P. J., and Macombee, J., concurred.
That portion of order of Surrogate of Erie county appealed from reversed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements.