New York City

Published on: November 17, 2012

Court Decides a Guardianship Issue

by Stephen Bilkis

This is a case being heard by the Queens County Surrogate’s Court. The subject of this case involves the guardianship of three children. The mother of the children passed away in October of 1975 and the father died on the 24th of May, 1976.

Case History

Before the father passed away, he and the children lived with his mother and his brother. After he passed away, the children continued to live with their paternal grandmother and uncle. The uncle was married in September of 1976 and since this time the children have lived with their uncle and his wife.

Published on: November 15, 2012

Appellant Seeks to Enforce a Stipulation of Settlement

by Stephen Bilkis

This is a case being heard in the Second Department, Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York. The matter before the court is a contested probate proceeding. The executor of the estate is appealing an order that was made in the Surrogate’s Court of Queens County. The order was dated the 27th of July, 1989 and denied his motion to enforce a stipulation of settlement to admit the will for probate.

Case Discussion

On the 4th of October, 1988, a stipulation of settlement was entered between the appellant executor of the decedent’s estate and the widow and the sons of the decedent who had objected to probate of the will previously.

Published on: November 14, 2012

Appellant Requests Letters of Administration

by Stephen Bilkis

This is an appeal case being heard in the Second Department, Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York. The petitioner in this case is appealing an order of decree made in the Surrogate’s Court of Queens County. The order is dated the 2nd of May, 1980 and admitted to probate a will from March 7th of 1978 and also failed to order his application for letters of administration.

Case Discussion and Decision

The records for the case show that the will that was dated the 7th of March 1978 was properly admitted for probate over the challenge from the appellant. However, the Surrogate did make an error by denying the petition for letters of administration made by the appellant because of a conflict of interest.

Published on: November 13, 2012

Appellants Appeal Facts from a Previous Decree

by Stephen Bilkis

This is a matter being heard in the Supreme Court of the State of New York, Second Division of the Appellate Court. The issue involves a probate proceeding where the contestants are appealing the facts from a decree made in the Surrogate’s Court of Nassau County. The order in question was entered on the 23rd of May, 1962 on a jury verdict that admitted the propounded instrument for probate as the decedent’s will and revoked the letters of administration that were issued previously.

Case Discussion and Decision

The court finds if favor of the appellant and the decree is reversed on the law. The costs to the contestants are to be paid from the estate. The motion made by the contestants to set aside the jury verdict and deny probate of the propounded instrument is granted and the petition is dismissed. A New York Probate Lawyer said the letters of administration will be reinstated and the entire matter will be remitted to the Surrogates court.

Published on: November 12, 2012

Appellant Claims Undue Influence

by Stephen Bilkis

This is a case being heard in the Supreme Court of the State of New York, Appellate Division, and Second Department. The case involves a contested probate proceeding. The proponent in the case is appealing a decree made in the Surrogates Court of Queens County made on the 25th of May, 1962. The decree denied probate to the written instrument as the last will and testament of the decedent. It was adjudged that the will was executed under undue influence and fraud exerted upon her by the proponent.

Court Discussion and Decision

A New York Probate Lawyer said the proponent in this case is the son of the decedent and a lawyer. The two contestants in the case are the children of another son who is deceased. The proponent prepared the propounded instrument that bequeaths the estate in equal shares to him and his three sisters, but excludes the two contestants from any share of the estate.

Published on: November 11, 2012

Court Decides Jurisdiction of Will

by Stephen Bilkis

This is a probate case being held in the Surrogate’s Court of Queens County. The testatrix in the matter died a resident of Connecticut. She left both tangible and intangible personal property in Queens County. Her will states that her entire estate is to be divided equally between her two sons who are non residents. The oldest son is named as the executor of the estate and has filed a petition for probate in this court. After this proceeding was commenced, the younger brother who knew about the will received letters of administration from his mother’s estate in Connecticut. The youngest son is now moving to dismiss the petition in this court for lack of jurisdiction.

Case Discussion and Decision

A New York Probate Lawyers said while it is inarguable that the testatrix was a resident of Connecticut and the two legatees are non residents, the court has the discretion to permit the original probate of a will of a non resident who dies outside of the state that leaves personal property within this county.

Published on: November 10, 2012

Court Decides Disposition of Real Property

by Stephen Bilkis

In a discovery hearing held before the Surrogate’s Court of the City of New York located in Nassau County the estate is seeking to establish the existence of a leasehold interest in commercial real property and to enforce its provisions. A New York Probate Lawyer said the petitioner has submitted an application to the court for preliminary injunction.

Case Background

The decedent passed away on the 2nd of May, 2004 and is survived by three children, one who is the respondent in the case. A petition has been filed for probate of an instrument that was dated the 2nd of July, 2002.

Published on: November 5, 2012

Petitioner Challenged Bequest of Retirement Account

by Stephen Bilkis

This case is being heard in the Supreme Court of the State of New York, Appellate Division, and Second Department. A New York Probate Lawyer said this is an appeal made by the petitioners of the matter. The petitioners are appealing an order that was made in the Surrogates Court of Queens County. The order denied their motion for summary judgment on their petition and determined that the bequest of a certain retirement account to others.

Court Discussion and Decision

The petitioner’s contend that the Surrogates court made an error in finding that the bequest was a specific bequest. However, this contention is contrary to the findings made in this court. The subject bequest was reviewed by this court and it is found that the Surrogate’s court made the correct decision in this matter.

Published on: November 4, 2012

Executor Petitions for Judicial Settlement

by Stephen Bilkis

This is a case being heard in the Second Judicial Department of the Supreme Court of the State of New York, Appellate Division. The case is a probate proceeding where the executor of the estate petitioned for judicial settlement of the decedent’s estate. A New York Probate Lawyer said the objectant is appealing an order made in the Surrogates Court of Queens County that granted the motion for summary judgment by the petitioner to have the objections dismissed. The order that judicially settled the account, made by the same court, is also being appealed.

Court Discussion and Decision

The court is ordering that the appeals be dismissed with all costs payable by the appellant personally.

Published on: November 2, 2012

Court Finds Executors Pay Excessive

by Stephen Bilkis

This is a case being heard in the Surrogate’s Court of Queens County. The court has started this proceeding in regard to its own administrative rule that requires an account to be filed within a year of the date a fiduciary is appointed who is also an attorney.

Case Background

In this case the attorney/fiduciary was ordered to file an accounting with this court no later than one year after the date of the decree and failure to do so will result in the letters being revoked. The executor has filed his account within the set time limit.