
    In re KUHN.
    (Supreme Court,' Appellate Division, First Department.
    January 20,1911.)
    In the matter of the judicial settlement of the ... account of -Mary E. Kuhn, as administratrix ’ of the estate of Mathais Simendinger, deceased. Proceedings remanded to the Surrogate’s Court.
   PER CURIAM.

While the applicant is prob- , t bly right in asserting that the appeal from the . k urrogate’s Court to the Appellate Division ) removes into the Supreme Court the whole } proceeding, so that the Surrogate’s Court is I 'divested of jurisdiction until the matter be for- ! mal.v remitted to the Surrogate’s Court, the v prop w proceeding in view of this settlement, which upon its face appears to be an entirely proper settlement and should be approved, would . be to allow the surrogate to give the necessary 1 consents to the settlement and fix the allowance to the guardians ad litem. The surrogate will undoubtedly approve of this settlement when the matter is brought on before him; but he can act more intelligently than can this court, Sas he has all the records before him, and can make such provisions as will protect the rights of the infants. An order can therefore be entered remitting the proceeding to the Surrogate’s Court, whereupon he would have full authority to pass upon the questions presented.  