In re Solomon

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re Solomon

290 A.D.2d 394, 737 N.Y.S.2d 267, 2002 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 893

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

DecidedJanuary 31, 2002

StatusPublished

This text of 290 A.D.2d 394 (In re Solomon) 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 Solomon, 290 A.D.2d 394, 737 N.Y.S.2d 267, 2002 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 893 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2002).

Pincite

Opinion

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Sheila Abdus-Salaam, J.), entered October 24, 2000, which denied appellant’s motion to reject the Special Referee’s report recommending approval of the committee’s final account, and granted the committee’s cross motion to confirm the Special Referee’s report, unanimously affirmed, with costs.

The motion court correctly confirmed the Special Referee’s, report recommending approval of the committee’s final account on the ground that appellant lacks standing to object thereto by reason of her concession that all of the funds maintained by the committee are owed to the City of New York as reimburse[395]*395ment for the nursing home care provided to the deceased incompetent person (SCPA 2205 [1] [b]; 103 [39]). In any event, as the motion court also held, appellant’s objections lack merit. Concur — Williams, J.P., Ellerin, Lerner, Rubin and Marlow, JJ.

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

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Sheila Abdus-Salaam, J.), entered October 24, 2000, which denied appellant’s motion to reject the Special Referee’s report recommending approval of the committee’s final account, and granted the committee’s cross motion to confirm the Special Referee’s report, unanimously affirmed, with costs.

The motion court correctly confirmed the Special Referee’s, report recommending approval of the committee’s final account on the ground that appellant lacks standing to object thereto by reason of her concession that all of the funds maintained by the committee are owed to the City of New York as reimburse[395]*395ment for the nursing home care provided to the deceased incompetent person (SCPA 2205 [1] [b]; 103 [39]). In any event, as the motion court also held, appellant’s objections lack merit. Concur — Williams, J.P., Ellerin, Lerner, Rubin and Marlow, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

290 A.D.2d 394, 737 N.Y.S.2d 267, 2002 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 893, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-solomon-nyappdiv-2002.