Staten Island

Published on: October 8, 2012

Court Hears Will Contest over Real Property

by Stephen Bilkis

This matter deals with the last will and testament of Irene N. Timblin, deceased. The case is being heard in the Surrogates Court of Suffolk County. The will has been propounded in the Surrogates Court of Suffolk County. The Public Administrator of Cascade County in California has raised objections to the probate upon the ground that the decedent died while living in Cascade County, California and not in Suffolk County.

Case Background

The decedent and her husband lived in Blueblinds at Smithtown in a manor home located on Long Island. The graves are located near Saint James. The husband passed away in November of 1955 and his wife passed away in May of 1956.

Published on: September 13, 2012

Court Rules on Full Faith and Credit Act of the Constitution

by Stephen Bilkis

This matter deals with Howard E. Bennett, who is also known as Ward Bennett and is deceased. The appellant in the case is David White. Robert Middleton, et al is the respondents in this matter. The case is being heard in the Supreme Court of the State of New York, Appellate Division, and Second Judicial Department.

A New York Family Lawyer said the the petitioner, David White is appealing an order that was made in the Surrogate’s Court of Suffolk County made on the 21st of December, 2009 that granted the motion of Andrew Sabin for leave to intervene in the proceeding and revoked his ancillary letters testamentary and an order from the same court that was made on the 24th of June, 2010 upon renewal and re-argument of the case adhered to the original determination made in the December 21st decision.

Case Background

Published on: September 9, 2012

Court Decides Jurisdiction Issue

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. In this case the objectants are appealing a decree made in the Surrogate’s Court of Queens County. A New York Probate Lawyer said the decree was made on the 9th of September, 1975 and adjudged that the decedent died as a resident of Queens County. A will was admitted to the court for probate and letters of testamentary were provided to the people named in the will as executors of the estate.

Case Background

The decedent, was the successful owner of a business complex that manufactured plastic products for the school stationery industry. The business was run in the city of Flushing located in Queens County. In 1965, he had one of his corporations rent an apartment for him to use in Miami Beach. He used the apartment from January of 1966 through 1969. When the lease for the apartment was made the decedent was living in a penthouse apartment located in Manhattan. He had created an apartment out of an upper space of one of his business buildings for convenience. He would stay in that apartment from time to time as well.

Published on: August 9, 2012

Court Discusses Supplemental Needs Trust

by Stephen Bilkis

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.

Published on: August 7, 2012

Guardian ad Litem Contends Undue Influence

by Stephen Bilkis

This is a probate proceeding that questions the will of Vito DeMarco, the deceased. The case involves the administrator of the estate, Christina Matozzo versus the Trustee of the Vito DeMarco Living Trust, Anthony DeMarco. Mr. DeMarco is seeking to declare that the trust is invalid. The case is being heard in the Surrogate’s Court of the State of New York.

Proceedings

There are currently three different proceedings that are pending in regard to the Vito DeMarco estate. The first is the proceeding that seeks to assert that the Vito DeMarco Living Trust that is dated the 19th of March, 2001 as invalid.

Published on: August 3, 2012

Plaintiff Filed Objection to Probate of Will

by Stephen Bilkis

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

Published on: August 1, 2012

Daughter Contests Father’s Will

by Stephen Bilkis

In a proceeding, a daughter of a deceased man filed a motion for a decision without trial and objected the petition for probate of her father’s will. The petition was brought by the sister of deceased man and the nominated estate administrator under the last will and testament.

The last will and testament of the deceased man was offered for validation. In his will, the man directed that his entire estate be distributed to his sister. The document reflects that the attesting witnesses were the draftsperson of the will and the draftsperson’s legal assistant. The daughter however filed multiple objections to the will, focusing primarily on an alleged lack of due implementation. The daughter’s counsel examined the two attesting witnesses.

The motion requesting the decision without trial upon objections for the validation of the will and dismissal of the proceeding was followed a lengthy delay in which a settlement was reached concerning payment of the deceased person’s non-probate death benefits, however no settlement was reached in connection with the distribution of the deceased person’s property. In the daughter’s affidavit, she alleges that her aunt cannot appropriately demonstrate due implementation of the proposed last will and testament. In support for the statement, the daughter presents that the one witness cannot recall the will signing ceremony, that the self-proving affidavit was improperly notarized, that the her father failed to initial each page of his will and the proponent’s counsel did not produce her for examination.

Published on: July 30, 2012

Guardian ad Litem Contends Court Lacks Jurisdiction

by Stephen Bilkis

In this proceeding for leave to compromise an action for wrongful death and conscious pain and suffering, the decedent was survived by his wife and two children all of whom presently reside in Ecuador. A New York Probate Lawyer said the decedent died as a result of injuries he sustained in a construction accident in Bronx, New York. The Court issued limited letters to petitioner, Juan Chavez, decedent’s uncle, to commence this action. Thereafter the action was commenced. The Supreme Court, Bronx County, approved the compromise of the action for $790,000.00, allowed attorney disbursements of $5,897.70 and attorneys’ fees of $261,367.43. This estate proceeding was commenced to fix the allocation of the recovery, reimburse the funeral creditors and fix the distribution of the balance among the distributees who suffered a pecuniary loss.

A Kings Estate Administration Lawyer said that, the petitioner served a citation in this matter by international certified mail, return receipt requested, upon decedent’s widow, Blanca Germania Guzman Marquez. Petitioner also served Blanca Germania Guzman Marquez with the citation on that date as the mother of decedent’s infant daughters, Blanca Raquel Pesantez Guzman and Carla Leonor Pesantez Guzman. Another citation was served that date on the infant, Blanca Raquel Pesantez Guzman since she was over 14 years old on that date. Service was complete on the date of the mailing thereof. No one appeared on that date. By court order, a guardian ad litem was appointed for Blanca Raquel Pesantez Guzman (hereinafter “Raquel”) and Carla Leonor Pesantez Guzman (hereinafter “Carla”). Thereafter, the guardian ad litem filed his report.

A Kings Estate Administration Lawyer said that, in the guardian ad litem’s report he points out that Raquel turned eighteen after he was appointed but before finalization of his report. The guardian ad litem reports that he has examined the file in this matter and concludes that the court lacks jurisdiction over Raquel presumably because of her eighteenth birthday and the fact that she is no longer under a disability. The guardian ad litem reports that he communicated this fact to petitioner’s attorney and suggested that he send a waiver and consent to Ecuador for Raquel’s signature and filed it with the Court. The guardian ad litem made his recommendations with respect to the compromise subject to jurisdiction. No waiver and consent to the relief requested was ever filed by Raquel.

Published on: July 25, 2012

Court Decides on Payments to Ancillary Executor

by Stephen Bilkis

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.

Published on: July 19, 2012

Court Decides Reasonable Attorney’s Fees in Estate Matter

by Stephen Bilkis

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.