Jonathan Robinson v. . Seth Raynor and Others.

Summary

The New York Court of Appeals reversed the Supreme Court and affirmed the surrogate's decree, holding that Jonathan Robinson is a creditor entitled to compensation from his father's estate for services rendered under a mutual understanding that payment would be made by devise of the homestead farm. The court affirmed the surrogate's factual findings and applied the rule that the manner of the failure to compensate—accident or design—is immaterial.