Gaines v. City of New York

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Gaines v. City of New York

137 A.D.3d 673, 29 N.Y.S.3d 270

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

DecidedMarch 29, 2016

Docket633 14471/03

StatusPublished

This text of 137 A.D.3d 673 (Gaines v. City of New York) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Gaines v. City of New York, 137 A.D.3d 673, 29 N.Y.S.3d 270 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2016).

Pincite

Opinion

Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Howard H. Sherman, J.), entered August 22, 2014, which denied claimant’s cross motion to, among other things, amend a prior order, same court (Edgar G. Walker, J.), entered August 17, 2010, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Prior to the death of plaintiff’s daughter (decedent), decedent had entered into a settlement with defendants Metropolitan Transportation Authority (MTA) and Evercare Home Health Care Services Inc., resolving a personal injury action. Upon entering into the settlement, decedent, who was receiving supplemental security income, Medicare and Medicaid due to several preexisting conditions, petitioned the court to approve and authorize the creation of a supplemental needs trust (SNT) (see 42 USC § 1396p [c] [2] [B] [iv]; [d] [4] [A]; Social Services Law § 366 [2] [b] [2] [iii] [A]), into which the settlement proceeds would be transferred. By order entered August 17, 2010, the petition was granted. On or about September 23, *674 2010, the MTA sent its portion of the settlement to decedent’s counsel, who placed the funds in escrow pending completion of the documents creating and funding the SNT. On November 8, 2010, before she had the opportunity to formally execute the trust documents, decedent died. Thereafter, claimant, which was to be the remainderman of the SNT, moved for, among other things, the principal and interest that remains in the SNT.

The motion court correctly denied the motion, because decedent’s failure to complete the formalities associated with setting up the SNT prior to her death was fatal to the SNT’s existence. Neither decedent nor the putative trustee executed or acknowledged the proposed trust agreement, and the SNT was never properly funded with the settlement proceeds (see EPTL 7-1.17, 7-1.18; Fasano v DiGiacomo, 49 AD3d 683, 684-685 [2d Dept 2008], lv denied 11 NY3d 710 [2008]; see also Matter of Bishop v Maurer, 73 AD3d 455, 455 [1st Dept 2010]). Accordingly, a valid SNT was never created.

The proposed SNT is a “lifetime trust” within the meaning of the EPTL, and therefore the formality requirements of that statute are applicable (EPTL 1-2.20). Although a trust “created by [a] judgment or decree of a court” is not considered a lifetime trust (id.), that exception does not apply here, because the order “establish [ing]” the SNT is not a judgment or decree of a court.

We have considered claimant’s remaining arguments and find them unavailing.

Concur—Friedman, J.P., Andrias, Saxe and Richter, JJ.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Howard H. Sherman, J.), entered August 22, 2014, which denied claimant’s cross motion to, among other things, amend a prior order, same court (Edgar G. Walker, J.), entered August 17, 2010, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Prior to the death of plaintiff’s daughter (decedent), decedent had entered into a settlement with defendants Metropolitan Transportation Authority (MTA) and Evercare Home Health Care Services Inc., resolving a personal injury action. Upon entering into the settlement, decedent, who was receiving supplemental security income, Medicare and Medicaid due to several preexisting conditions, petitioned the court to approve and authorize the creation of a supplemental needs trust (SNT) (see 42 USC § 1396p [c] [2] [B] [iv]; [d] [4] [A]; Social Services Law § 366 [2] [b] [2] [iii] [A]), into which the settlement proceeds would be transferred. By order entered August 17, 2010, the petition was granted. On or about September 23, *674 2010, the MTA sent its portion of the settlement to decedent’s counsel, who placed the funds in escrow pending completion of the documents creating and funding the SNT. On November 8, 2010, before she had the opportunity to formally execute the trust documents, decedent died. Thereafter, claimant, which was to be the remainderman of the SNT, moved for, among other things, the principal and interest that remains in the SNT.

The motion court correctly denied the motion, because decedent’s failure to complete the formalities associated with setting up the SNT prior to her death was fatal to the SNT’s existence. Neither decedent nor the putative trustee executed or acknowledged the proposed trust agreement, and the SNT was never properly funded with the settlement proceeds (see EPTL 7-1.17, 7-1.18; Fasano v DiGiacomo, 49 AD3d 683, 684-685 [2d Dept 2008], lv denied 11 NY3d 710 [2008]; see also Matter of Bishop v Maurer, 73 AD3d 455, 455 [1st Dept 2010]). Accordingly, a valid SNT was never created.

The proposed SNT is a “lifetime trust” within the meaning of the EPTL, and therefore the formality requirements of that statute are applicable (EPTL 1-2.20). Although a trust “created by [a] judgment or decree of a court” is not considered a lifetime trust (id.), that exception does not apply here, because the order “establish [ing]” the SNT is not a judgment or decree of a court.

We have considered claimant’s remaining arguments and find them unavailing.

Concur—Friedman, J.P., Andrias, Saxe and Richter, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

137 A.D.3d 673, 29 N.Y.S.3d 270, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/gaines-v-city-of-new-york-nyappdiv-2016.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack