
    
      In re Oraindi’s Estate.
    
      (Supreme Court, General Term, Second Department.
    
    May 12, 1890.)
    Appealable Orders—Discretion of Surrogate.
    An order of a surrogate requiring an attorney to deposit moneys collected by Mm for the estate of a decedent pending an investigation as to Ms right to retain the same is discretionary, and not appealable.
    Appeal from surrogate’s court, Kings county.
    The surrogate entered an order requiring Jacob C. Stines, an attorney and counsellor at law, to deposit with the Kings County Trust Company $593.66, being moneys collected by him for the account of the estate of Graciano de Oraindi, deceased, pending a reference as to whether he has any claim thereto for services rendered the estate; and he appeals.
    Argued before Barnard, P. J„ and Dykman and Pratt, JJ.
    
      King & Clement, for appellant. J. Stewart Ross, for respondents.
   Pratt, J.

This appeal was from an intermediate order made by the surrogate of Kings county having regard to the safety of the fund of the above-named estate pending an investigation. The order was clearly within the discretion of the surrogate, and therefore no appeal would lie. No right of the attorney was impaired by the order, as it only provided for the safe custody of the estate while the claims of the creditors and the attorney could be properly adjusted. It is clear the surrogate had jurisdiction of the subject-matter, and the order was discretionary. This suggestion answers the appeal, and renders further comment unnecessary. Order affirmed, with costs.  