In re Rubino

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re Rubino

253 A.D.2d 883, 678 N.Y.S.2d 512, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9830

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

DecidedSeptember 28, 1998

StatusPublished

This text of 253 A.D.2d 883 (In re Rubino) 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

In re Rubino, 253 A.D.2d 883, 678 N.Y.S.2d 512, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9830 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1998).

Pincite

Opinion

In a proceeding pursuant to SCPA 2103 to discover property withheld from the estate of Angelo Rubino, also known as Angelo Rubino, Sr., Marie Sullivan Rubino appeals from a decree of the Surrogate’s Court, Rockland County (Weiner, S.), dated September 22, 1997, which, after a nonjury trial, determined that the executor had title to and the right to possession of specified stocks [884]*884and bonds, including dividends and interest, and directed that such property be turned over to the executor.

Ordered that the decree is affirmed, with costs payable by the appellant personally.

Contrary to the appellant’s contention, the Surrogate did not err in determining that the antenuptial agreement she entered into with her now-deceased husband created a right of survivor-ship only as to property held in both of their names. Accordingly, the Surrogate properly ordered the appellant to turn over assets as to which she was not named as an owner (see, SCPA 2103). Copertino, J. P., Santucci, Goldstein and Luciano, JJ., concur.

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

In a proceeding pursuant to SCPA 2103 to discover property withheld from the estate of Angelo Rubino, also known as Angelo Rubino, Sr., Marie Sullivan Rubino appeals from a decree of the Surrogate’s Court, Rockland County (Weiner, S.), dated September 22, 1997, which, after a nonjury trial, determined that the executor had title to and the right to possession of specified stocks [884]*884and bonds, including dividends and interest, and directed that such property be turned over to the executor.

Ordered that the decree is affirmed, with costs payable by the appellant personally.

Contrary to the appellant’s contention, the Surrogate did not err in determining that the antenuptial agreement she entered into with her now-deceased husband created a right of survivor-ship only as to property held in both of their names. Accordingly, the Surrogate properly ordered the appellant to turn over assets as to which she was not named as an owner (see, SCPA 2103). Copertino, J. P., Santucci, Goldstein and Luciano, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

253 A.D.2d 883, 678 N.Y.S.2d 512, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9830, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-rubino-nyappdiv-1998.