Griffin v. Yien Koo King

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Griffin v. Yien Koo King

8 A.D.3d 10, 777 N.Y.S.2d 301, 2004 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7438

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

DecidedJune 1, 2004

StatusPublished

This text of 8 A.D.3d 10 (Griffin v. Yien Koo King) 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

Griffin v. Yien Koo King, 8 A.D.3d 10, 777 N.Y.S.2d 301, 2004 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7438 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2004).

Pincite

Opinion

Order, Surrogate’s Court, New York County (Eve Preminger, S.), entered on or about November 18, 2003, which denied the cross motion of respondents Yien Koo King, Kenneth King and Cy Art, Ltd. to modify a temporary restraining order to permit the sale or disposition of 93 works of art, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

In light of the circumstances presented in this bitter family dispute over the estate of the artist and collector Chi-Chuan Wang, the temporary restraining order, originally issued on consent, should remain undisturbed so as to preserve the status quo while petitioner conducts the SCPA 2103 discovery proceeding and determines what property belongs to the estate (see Danae Art Intl, v Stallone, 163 AD2d 81 [1990]).

We have considered respondents-appellants’ remaining contentions and find them unavailing. Concur—Buckley, P.J., Tom, Mazzarelli, Sullivan and Ellerin, JJ.

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

Order, Surrogate’s Court, New York County (Eve Preminger, S.), entered on or about November 18, 2003, which denied the cross motion of respondents Yien Koo King, Kenneth King and Cy Art, Ltd. to modify a temporary restraining order to permit the sale or disposition of 93 works of art, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

In light of the circumstances presented in this bitter family dispute over the estate of the artist and collector Chi-Chuan Wang, the temporary restraining order, originally issued on consent, should remain undisturbed so as to preserve the status quo while petitioner conducts the SCPA 2103 discovery proceeding and determines what property belongs to the estate (see Danae Art Intl, v Stallone, 163 AD2d 81 [1990]).

We have considered respondents-appellants’ remaining contentions and find them unavailing. Concur—Buckley, P.J., Tom, Mazzarelli, Sullivan and Ellerin, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

8 A.D.3d 10, 777 N.Y.S.2d 301, 2004 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7438, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/griffin-v-yien-koo-king-nyappdiv-2004.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack