Articles Posted in Queens

Published on:

by

This action involves a case where the court considered that defendant violated a certain restrictive covenant claimed by plaintiffs to affect the lots or parcels of land within an area located in the Borough of Brooklyn.

In the year 1893, deceased died testate seized of said real property. His will was duly admitted to probate by the Surrogate of the County of Kings. By said will the testator’s real property was devised to his children and his executors were given a power of sale.

On or about April 28, 1899 said executors caused to be filed in the office of the Clerk of the County of Kings a map entitled ‘Map of Property Belonging to the Estate of Deceased.’ By said map, the land within the area was subdivided into building lots. All of the lots within the tract, except those fronting on Flatbush Avenue, were conveyed by deeds containing a restrictive covenant in form as follows:

Continue reading

Published on:

by

This is a probate proceeding in regard to the deceased, Edward R. Barclay’s will. The case is being heard in the Surrogate’s Court of the State of New York in Nassau County. The judge in the case is John B. Riordan.

Probate Issues

In this particular probate case there are two issues set before the court. The first issue is that the spouse of the decedent, Josephine M. Barclay, is in opposition of the preliminary letters being granted to Peter and Kathleen Hesse. Additionally, Ms. Barclay has moved to revoke her waiver and consent.

Continue reading

Published on:

by

Suffolk Probate 13

The plaintiff in this case is Rachel Kuncman. The defendants in the case are Steven A. Sherman, American Portfolios Financial Services, Inc., the Abraham Salomon and Tobi Weinstein estates both individually ans as the executrix of the Abraham Salomon estate. The case is being heard in the Nassau County Supreme Court. The judge overseeing the case is Stephen A. Bucaria.

Case History

Continue reading

Published on:

by

The woman died leaving a Will. At the time of her death, the woman was a resident of Florida and supplementary letters of estate administration were issued to the executor of the estate. The accounting covers the period May 3, 2004 to April 21, 2009. An amended accounting covering the period May 3, 2004 to December 22, 2009 was filed on February 5, 2010. The amended accounting shows principal charges to the accounting party of $829,804.35.

Objections to the accounting and the amended accounting were filed by the $10,000.00 legatee and the beneficiary of fifty percent (50%) of the residuary properties. The ancillary executor is the beneficiary of the other fifty percent (50%) share of the residuary properties. By documents dated December 2, 2010, the executor withdrew his objections to both the first account and the amended account.

A New York Probate Lawyer said with respect to the issue of attorneys’ fees, the court bears the ultimate responsibility for approving legal fees that are charged to an estate and has the discretion to determine what constitutes reasonable compensation for legal services rendered in the course of an estate. While there is no hard and fast rule to calculate reasonable compensation to an attorney in every case, the Surrogate is required to exercise his or her authority with reason, proper discretion and not arbitrarily.

Continue reading

Published on:

by

This is a case being heard in the Surrogate’s Court of New York County. The issue of the case deals with the estate of Emma B. Johnson. The executor and petitioner for the estate is Norman W. Roe. The respondents in the case are Long Island College Hospital, The Industrial Home for the Blind, and St. Faith’s House.

Objections

The issue of this case involves objections to the amount of legal fees that have been paid to the law firm of Vunk & Carleton. The three objectors of the case were given equal parts of half of the estate of Emma B. Johnson. The owner of the other half of the estate is Norman W. Roe. Norman Roe is the temporary administrator and executor of the estate and is the brother of the testatrix.

Continue reading

Published on:

by

A man and his wife consulted a lawyer to plan the disposition of their estates on the event of their demise. The man and his wife both executed individual wills based on the advice and opinion of the lawyer they both consulted.

When the man died, his will was submitted for probate. His wife was named as executor of his will. The other heirs named in the will were the man’s children. During the probate proceedings, the children of the man asked that the executrix, the wife of the testator, be compelled to submit copies of the notes and letters sent by the lawyer of the testator to the testator where he summarized the wishes of the testator regarding the disposition of his estate.

A New York Probate Lawyer said the children of the testator claim that the attorney’s notes and his letters to the testator will yield information regarding his true wishes as he communicated it to his lawyer; it will also inform the court regarding the state of mind of the testator and may show whether the testator had the necessary testamentary capacity.

Continue reading

Published on:

by

In this proceeding, the two estate administrators contested to the final accounting of the last will and testament of a man. They contested to the two stipulations signed by the interested parties to the accounting. The court previously issued a decision in which the attorneys of the complainants were directed to submit an executed copy of the second stipulation and their affidavits of legal services. The sole issue here is the approval of legal fees.

Based on records, in evaluating the cost of legal services, the court may consider a number of factors which includes the time spent, the complexity of the questions involved, the nature of the services provided, the amount and complexity of litigation required, the amounts involved and the benefit resulting from the execution of such services, the lawyer’s experience and reputation and the customary fee charged by the bar for similar services.

The affidavits filed with the court that reflect legal services provided by three different law firms, each of which will be addressed separately.

Continue reading

Published on:

by

The wife of a chemical engineering professor left a piece of real property which comprised a substantial portion of her estate worth around $2,800,000 to a polytechnic university. She also left the sum of $2,000,000 as a charitable endowment gift to the same polytechnic university provided that it shall be used as an award to the Distinguished Professorship of Chemical Engineering. A New York Probate Lawyer said the rest of her estate was given as a gift to be used to fund graduate research fellowships or an endowment fund. According to her last will and testament, these cash sums should be restricted to the uses she had enumerated and trusts should be created and the income from the trusts can be used by the same university for general purposes to construct or acquire a building in the name of her late husband.

The woman’s husband was a professor of chemical engineering at the polytechnic university; they lived in the university and spent most of their lives at the university. She also left one quarter of her residual estate worth $126,000,000 to the university as a gift under the same conditions.

The will was probated and the executors rendered their accounting in 2003. In total, the polytechnic university received over $130,000,000 under the woman’s will and the university held $70,400,000 in an endowment fund in her husband’s name with the restrictions stated.

Published on:

by

The facts:

A mother (hereinafter The Mother) lived with her son (hereinafter The Son). The son was devoted to his mother. A New York Probate Lawyer said she was unable to handle her own affairs, thus, he supervised her medical care. He managed her financial affairs and made sure that she paid her bills timely.

On 25 August 2000, the son died. He was then 64 and his mother was almost 96. The son executed a will dated 23 May 1996. In his will, he left his residuary estate in trust for the benefit of his mother. He named two persons, the petitioners (petitioner-one and petitioner-two), as executors of his will and trustees of the residuary trust. Under the terms of the trust, the trustees were to pay the net income to the mother, quarter-annually. In addition, the trustees were authorized to invade principal for the benefit of the mother; and upon the death of the mother, the trust terminates and that from the principal then remaining, certain amounts would be given to the petitioners and to other individuals.

Continue reading

Published on:

by

This case is being heard in the Surrogates Court of Suffolk County. The matter at hand involves the issue of proving the last will and testament of the deceased, Sigrid C. Lockwood as a will of real property and personal property. The case also deals with a petition regarding the ancillary letters testamentary for the same estate.

The question is this case is in regard to the wills left by the decedent, Sigrid C. Lockwood. At the time of her death she was living in Norway. This is where she was cremated. She was a United States citizen at the time. She executed a will in December of 1951 which has been offered for probate to this court. She also executed another will in Norway in April of 1953. This will has been probated in Norway. The executor named in the will is requesting letters ancillary from the court.

Case Background

Continue reading

Contact Information