New York City

Published on: November 18, 2012

Court Analyzes Format of the Will

by Stephen Bilkis

This is a case being heard in the Surrogate’s Court of Queens County. The matter involves the executor of a will who is requesting that the court construe the instrument, particularly the first paragraph in order to determine what is to be charged to the legacy that he receives under it.

Court Discussion

The paragraph that is being question reads, “After my lawful debts are paid I bequeath the sum of $10,000 to the executor. A New York Probate Lawyer said that out of this sum he is to pay my funeral expenses and other lawful debts and pay for the perpetual care for my grave and the grave of my late husband.”

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 16, 2012

Appellant Brings Motion to Strike Affirmative Defense of Lack of Personal Jurisdiction

by Stephen Bilkis

This case is taking place in the New York Supreme Court.

Case Background

There are a series of four motions in this particular case. The first motion in this case was originally brought on by the order to show cause in the Queens County court and then transferred to this court. A New York Probate Lawyer said the action is brought forth on behalf of the plaintiff from the third action and requests the reversal of priority depositions made between the defendant and the plaintiff and to direct the defendant to appear for a deposition.

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 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 9, 2012

Court Determines if Will is Valid

by Stephen Bilkis

This case involves a probate proceeding and is being heard in the Surrogate’s Court of Kings County. A New York Probate Lawyer said he instrument that is offered for probate in this matter is written on a regular piece of notebook paper that has been folding in half to form four pages. The entire paper is written in the handwriting of the decedent all the way down to the signature. The words “my will and testament” appear near the bottom of the page. Brooklyn Probate Lawyers said there are two witness signatures on the paper as well, along with their addresses. However, both witnesses are now deceased and there is no attestation clause.

Case Background

It is shown at the time the will was executed the decedent was a notary republic. The decedent deposited the will with the Surrogates Court of Queens County for safekeeping in June of 1933. The will remained in the custody of the said court until it was released to this court when the decedent passed away in 1965.

Published on: November 8, 2012

Appellants Contends Decedent Lacked Testamentary Capacity

by Stephen Bilkis

This is a case being heard in front of the Supreme Court of the State of New York, Appellate Division, and Second Judicial Department. The case is a contested probate proceeding. The objectant of the case is appealing a decree made by the Surrogates Court of Queens County. The decree granted the petitioners motion for summary judgment and dismissed the objections to probate based on undue influence and admitted the will for probate.

Case Background

The last will and testament of the decedent is dated the 18th of September, 2003. The decedent passed away on the 29th of July, 2007. The will left the entire estate to the proponent, who filed a petition for probate. The propounded will referred to the decedent’s daughter, the objectant of the case, and named her as the contingent beneficiary of the estate if the proponent predeceased the decedent. The objectant filed objectants to the probate of the will alleging that it was written by the testator executed this will under undue influence by the proponent.

Published on: November 6, 2012

Court Interpretes Last Will and Testament

by Stephen Bilkis

This is a probate matter dealing with the will of the decedent. In this proceeding it has been requested that a construction of specific paragraphs of the decedents will be conducted. A New York Probate Lawyer said in the second paragraph of the will it is clearly written that the premises located at 42-32 81st Street in Elmhurst, Queens County, New York be left to her daughter. The condition to the home being given to her daughter is that it cannot be sold until ten years after the decedent’s death.

In the seventh paragraph of the will the testator named her other daughter as the sole beneficiary of the income of the home located at 42-30 81st Street in Elmhurst, Queens County, New York. The paragraph goes on to state that if the marital relationship between her daughter and her daughter’s husband is terminated either by the death of the husband or through divorce the property is to be hers absolutely and forever.

Court Decision