It has recently been held that the refusal of the Surrogate’s Court to grant an ex parte application for an order to show cause to commence a proceeding, wherein petitioner sought to recover possession of certain premises together with rent owing and due, was an abuse of discretion (Martin Operating Corp. v Hertzan, 106 AD2d 784, 785, citing Matter of Piccione, supra): "Based upon our review of the papers on the present application * * * it cannot be said at the present stage that it is abundantly clear that the matter in controversy in no way affects the affairs of the decedent or the administration of his estate.” The Third Department directed the Delaware County Surrogate to issue an order to show cause authorizing commencement of proceedings to recover possession of the premises and rent due. Similar are Matter of Rungo (74 Misc 2d 239, 241) and Matter of Goldstein (79 Misc 2d 4), holding that a discovery proceeding under SCPA 2103 appropriately encompasses discovery and collection of the rents and profits of real property, which is the issue here involved.
There was no abuse of discretion by the Surrogate.