The Second Department of New York’s Appellate Division has affirmed a decision of Suffolk County Surrogate John M. Czygier Jr. which refused to admit a codicil to probate because of undue influence.In the Matter of Emilio Pelegrino 817 N.Y.S.2d 121 (A.D. 2 Dept 2006), a second codicil to an 84 year old’s will disinherited his grandson in place of his sister-in-law who was also the proponent of the will.Continue Reading Codicil Denied Probate Because of Undue Influence

The Fourth Department of New York’s Appellate Division has held that the payment of a beneficiary’s college tuition and secondary school expenses by her father-co-trustee from trust assets did not constitute self-dealing . In the Matter of  Burton Wallens, Deceased 816  N.Y.S. 2d 793  court upheld a lower court’s decision which dismissed the beneficiary’s objections and ruled that there had been no breach of fiduciary duty.Continue Reading Trustee Absolved Of Charge Of Self-Dealing

Death may be a good excuse for not showing up for work in the morning but it will not always relieve one of the obligations spelled out in a contract. Such was the case in the matter of Di Scipio v. Sullivan 816 N.Y.S.2d 577 recently decided by the Third Department of New York’s Appellate Division.
Continue Reading Death Fails To Relieve Estate of Obligations Contracted For During Decedent’s Lifetime

The terrorist attacks of September 11th have begun to impact our legal system as various cases dealing with claims of survivors of victims have been wending their way through the courts. In a matter of first impression, the Second Department of New York’s Appellate Division has upheld a lower court determination which denied the summary judgment motion of a personal representative in the matter of Cruz v. McAneney 816 N.Y.S. 2d 486.


Continue Reading Domestic Partner’s Claim for 9/11 Benefits Allowed To Go Forward

In Terrorem ("no contest") clauses are pesky little short –but often sharp– spikes which must be treated with extreme caution lest they deprive a beneficiary of any rights under the will. Such was the case in In re Bernstein v. Lo Pata decided by Nassau County Surrogate John Riordan and reported in the New York Law Journal on May 30, 2006 at page 45.
Continue Reading In Terrorem Clause Enforced Disenfranchising Beneficiary

The Fourth Department of  New York’s Appellate Division has expanded the rights of nonmarital children to inherit. In the Matter of Uhl,628 a Surrogate’s Court had earlier determined that Lora Elkins and Sally Himelsbach were not entitled to inherit a portion of their cousin’s estate after she died intestate in 2003 leaving six cousins. The lower court found that four of the decedent’s cousins on the decedent’s father’s side were able to establish their rights as distributees but that Ms. Elkins and Ms. Himelsbach were ineligible to do so because they had been unable to prove their parents had been married at the time of their births.

Under existing law at the time their father died in 1953, the sisters would have been precluded from inheriting from their father or his "kindred". Their father was the decedent’s maternal grandfather, thereby placing them as cousins on the decedent’s mother’s side .Continue Reading Appellate Ruling Expands Inheritance Rights of Nonmarital Children

A decision of Nassau County Surrogate John Riordan in Estate of Grace De Lutri 324441 recently published on June 22 in the New York Law Journal determined that a decedent’s 1982 will was revoked by the express terms and operation of law of her subsequent 1989 will. 
Continue Reading Express Terms of Subsequent Will Found to Revoke an Earlier Will

A New York State Supreme Court decision in Rivers v. Genesis Holding LLC 812 N.Y.S. 2d 301 is a powerful reminder about the perils of settling a case involving an estate before all the “t” s are crossed and all the “i” s are dotted. This negligence action settled for only $7,500 in New York County (Manhattan) . Plaintiff died after commencing the action to recover for injuries she suffered in a slip and fall. After her administratrix was substituted , attorneys for the parties agreed on a settlement subject to the Surrogate’s Courts approval. This settlement was made in open court and was marked “settled” on the court system’s computer.
Continue Reading State Supreme Court Settlement Conditioned On Surrogate’s Approval Unravels