New York Probate and Estate Administration Lawyer Blog

Published on: July 8, 2026

Estate Beneficiaries May Consent to Executor Commissions Despite Will Waiver: Matter of Goldberg, 2008 NY Slip Op 28534

by Stephen Bilkis

Executors are generally entitled to receive compensation for administering an estate under New York law. In most cases, that compensation is calculated according to a statutory formula based on the value of the probate estate. However, a will may provide that the executor is to serve without compensation. Matter of Goldberg presented the question of whether an executor could receive statutory commissions when the will expressly prohibited payment, but all of the beneficiaries agreed that the executor should nevertheless be compensated.

Background

Bruce Goldberg died in 2007, leaving a will that was admitted to probate in Nassau County. The will named Steven Ostrer as executor. It also contained a provision stating that anyone serving as executor or trustee, including an attorney, would not be paid for performing those duties.

Published on: July 7, 2026

Trustee Cannot Be Removed Based Solely on Disagreements Over Trust Administration: Matter of Damiano, 2026 NY Slip Op 00297

by Stephen Bilkis

A trustee is responsible for managing trust property, making distributions to beneficiaries when appropriate, and carrying out the wishes of the person who created the trust. Although beneficiaries may disagree with a trustee’s decisions, not every disagreement is grounds for removal. In Matter of Damiano, the Appellate Division, Third Department, considered when a New York court may remove a trustee and what evidence is required to justify that decision.

Background

Jennifer Damiano created separate trusts for her two children through her will. The trusts were to hold the children’s inheritance until each child reached age 25. She appointed a close friend as trustee and gave the trustee broad authority to manage the trust assets, make investments, approve distributions, and hire attorneys when necessary.

Published on: July 6, 2026

Estate Co-Owner Could Not Eject Fellow Beneficiaries Without Showing Sale Was Necessary for Estate Administration: Matter of Pisarik (Roma), 2024 NY Slip Op 50363(U)

by Stephen Bilkis

The Queens County Surrogate’s Court considered whether an executor could evict fellow beneficiaries from estate property in order to sell the property. In Matter of Pisarik, the court examined the limits of an executor’s authority when beneficiaries become co-owners of inherited real estate and whether estate administration justified removing those occupants from the property.

Background

Michael Roma died in 2022, leaving a will that was later admitted to probate. His primary asset was a two-family home located in Corona, Queens. Under the residuary clause of the will, the property passed in equal shares to the decedent’s niece, Ramona Taveras Pisarik, who also served as executor, and to the decedent’s longtime tenants and friends, Maria Castillo and Santo Castillo.

Published on: July 3, 2026

Bank That Wrongfully Released Estate Funds Could Not Undo Default Judgment: Matter of Rosenblatt (Kozerska), 2026 NY Slip Op 50969(U)

by Stephen Bilkis

When someone dies, money held in the person’s bank accounts does not automatically become available to family members. In most cases, the bank must wait until an executor or administrator has been appointed and presents the appropriate court-issued authority, such as Letters Testamentary or Letters of Administration, before releasing estate funds. If a bank distributes money without proper authority, it may be required to repay the estate. In Matter of Rosenblatt, the Queens County Surrogate’s Court considered whether a bank could set aside a default judgment entered against it after it failed to respond to a turnover proceeding seeking the return of estate funds.

Background

Pauline Kozerska died in January 2020. She had two bank accounts at JPMorgan Chase Bank. Although the accounts had originally been opened jointly with her father, he had died several years earlier, making Ms. Kozerska the sole owner.

Published on: June 30, 2026

Court Rules That a Fiduciary Cannot Be Removed Based on Disputed Kinship Claims Alone. Matter of Micka (Rivera), 2026 NY Slip Op 50331(U) (Sur. Ct. Putnam County Mar. 6, 2026)

by Stephen Bilkis

Estate administration often depends on accurately identifying a deceased person’s heirs. When questions arise about whether all potential distributees were disclosed during an administration proceeding, Surrogate’s Courts may be asked to determine whether a fiduciary obtained appointment through a material misrepresentation and whether removal is warranted. In Matter of Micka (Rivera), the Putnam County Surrogate’s Court considered whether letters of administration should be revoked after a purported half-nephew claimed that the administrator failed to identify him and other potential heirs during the original administration proceeding.

Background facts

Zita Rivera died intestate in October 2023 at age 63. She was unmarried, had no children, and was survived by her brother, Richard Rivera. In February 2024, the Surrogate’s Court issued letters of administration to Richard Rivera based on a petition that identified him as the decedent’s sole distributee.

Published on: June 29, 2026

Court Rules That Proof of Kinship Is the Core Issue in a Disputed Administration Petition, Matter of Barasch, 32 Misc. 2d 548 (Sur. Ct. Nassau County 1962)

by Stephen Bilkis

Estate administration depends on accurate information being provided to the Surrogate’s Court. When someone seeks appointment as an administrator, the petition must correctly identify the decedent’s heirs and other interested parties. If later evidence suggests that information in the petition was incorrect, questions may arise about whether the fiduciary’s appointment should be revoked. In Matter of Barasch, the Nassau County Surrogate’s Court addressed whether an administratrix could retain her appointment when another individual claimed to be the decedent’s surviving spouse and argued that the original petition contained a false statement regarding kinship.

Background facts

The proceeding arose after letters of administration had been issued in the estate of Herman Barasch. The petitioner claimed to be the decedent’s surviving spouse and sought to revoke the administratrix’s letters.

Published on: June 28, 2026

An Heir Lacks Standing to Object to a Will if They Benefit More Under the Will Than Through Intestacy. Matter of Kelman, 2023 NY Slip Op 50914(U) (Sur. Ct. Suffolk County Aug. 3, 2023)

by Stephen Bilkis

In New York probate proceedings, not every family member has the right to object to a will. A person must have standing, meaning that the person must show that probate of the will would negatively affect his or her financial interest in the estate. In Matter of Kelman, the Suffolk County Surrogate’s Court considered whether a son of the decedent could object to probate when he would receive more under the will than he would receive if there were no will. The court held that because the objectant was not financially harmed by the will, he lacked standing to object.

Background facts

May Kelman died on January 25, 2018. She was survived by three children, Robert Kelman, Peter Kelman, and Edith Kelman. She was also survived by three grandchildren who were the children of her predeceased son, Michael Kelman.

Published on: June 27, 2026

Attorney-in-Fact Must Return Large Mortgage Payments Made Without Proper Authority. Matter of Goldstein, 2022 NY Slip Op 50709(U) (Sur. Ct. Westchester County Aug. 4, 2022)

by Stephen Bilkis

When someone acts under a power of attorney, that person is a fiduciary. That means the agent must act for the principal’s benefit, keep accurate records, avoid self-dealing, and explain financial transactions when later called upon to account. In Matter of Goldstein, the Westchester County Surrogate’s Court considered contested accountings filed by a fiduciary who had served both as attorney-in-fact during the decedent’s lifetime and later as executor of her estate. The case involved large transfers, alleged gifts, reimbursements, questions about joint and beneficiary accounts, and whether the fiduciary should be surcharged.

Background facts

Gertrude Goldstein was widowed and lived alone in her Mount Kisco home. Her only child had predeceased her. In 2006, she executed a statutory short form durable power of attorney naming David Salvati as her attorney-in-fact and naming Lisa Brytus as successor agent.

Published on: June 22, 2026

Daughter Established as Sole Distributee in Intestate Estate Dispute: Matter of Dow, 2026 NY Slip Op 26031

by Stephen Bilkis

When someone dies without a will, determining who has the legal right to inherit is often one of the first issues that must be resolved. In some cases, family members may disagree about who qualifies as an heir, particularly when questions arise about paternity or family relationships. A February 2026 decision from the Bronx County Surrogate’s Court illustrates how New York courts evaluate those disputes and the consequences that may follow when parties continue pursuing claims after the evidence no longer supports their position.

Background Facts

The decedent, Wayne Dow, died in April 2020 without a will. Shortly after his death, his brother, Alvin R. Dow, and a sister, Jacqueline Bazemore, filed a petition seeking appointment as administrators of the estate. They claimed that they, along with three other siblings, were the decedent’s only distributees. The decedent’s daughter, Milan Monroe, formerly known as Milan Paris Dow, later filed a cross-petition seeking letters of administration. She asserted that she was Wayne Dow’s daughter and, as his only child, was his sole distributee under New York law.

Published on: June 15, 2026

Richmond County Surrogate Court Replaces Nominated Fiduciary With Neutral Public Administrator. Matter of Barmapov, 2022 NY Slip Op 34438(U) (Sur. Ct. Richmond County Dec. 8, 2022)

by Stephen Bilkis

When family members are fighting over a will, disputes often arise over who should manage the estate while the probate proceeding is pending. Even when a person is nominated in a will to serve as executor, a Surrogate’s Court may refuse to appoint that person if evidence suggests that appointing them could jeopardize the proper administration of the estate. In Matter of Barmapov, the Richmond County Surrogate’s Court considered whether the decedent’s daughter should be appointed preliminary executor where the surviving spouse alleged undue influence, financial irresponsibility, and severe hostility between the parties. The court ultimately declined to appoint the daughter and instead appointed the Richmond County Public Administrator to oversee the estate during the litigation.

Background facts

Rebeca Barmapov died on October 6, 2022. She was survived by her husband, Benjamin Barmapov, and family members including her daughter, Erma-Erit Barmapov Segev. Following the decedent’s death, two purported testamentary documents became the subject of litigation. One was a formal will dated June 10, 2021. The other was an earlier handwritten document allegedly created by the decedent on May 12, 2021.