In re Estate of Swidow
This text of 13 A.D.3d 638 (In re Estate of Swidow) 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.
Opinion
In a proceeding pursuant to SCFA 2103 to discover property allegedly withheld, from a decedent’s estate, the petitioner appeals from an order of the Surrogate’s Court, Nassau County (Riordan, S.), dated August 19, 2003, which granted that branch of the motion of Fleet Bank which was for the imposition of costs pursuant to 22 NYCRR 130-1.1 (a) against the petitioner.
Ordered that the order is reversed, on the law, with costs payable by Fleet Bank, and that branch of the motion which was for the imposition of costs pursuant to 22 NYCRR 130-1.1 (a) against the petitioner is denied.
The Surrogate’s Court improperly determined that the conduct of the petitioner’s attorney in issuing and serving a subpoena duces tecum upon the respondent Fleet Bank was frivolous as that term is defined in 22 NYCRR 130-1.1. Contrary to Fleet Bank’s contention, service of the subpoena was properly made by delivery of the subpoena upon Fleet Bank as opposed to its attorney (see CPLR 2303 [a]; 311). Accordingly, the imposition of costs was unwarranted (see 22 NYCRR 130-[639]*6391.1; Hamilton v Cordero, 10 AD3d 702 [2004]; Matter of Gavilanes v Hilan, 281 AD2d 546 [2001]; Matter of Christopher, 280 AD2d 546 [2001]). Ritter, J.P., H. Miller, Schmidt, Crane and Skelos, JJ., concur.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
13 A.D.3d 638, 786 N.Y.S.2d 350, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-estate-of-swidow-nyappdiv-2004.