In re the Estate of Arrathoon

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re the Estate of Arrathoon

49 A.D.3d 325, 853 N.Y.2d 72

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

DecidedMarch 11, 2008

StatusPublished

This text of 49 A.D.3d 325 (In re the Estate of Arrathoon) 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 the Estate of Arrathoon, 49 A.D.3d 325, 853 N.Y.2d 72 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2008).

Pincite

Opinion

The court properly determined that respondent, who was petitioner and decedent’s daughter, did not meet her burden of demonstrating that petitioner abandoned decedent during his lifetime (see Matter of Riefberg, 58 NY2d 134 [1983]; Matter of Maiden, 284 NY 429 [1940]; Matter of Gardner, 176 AD2d 142 [1991], lv dismissed 78 NY2d 1124 [1991]). The evidence established that petitioner and decedent, who had been married for 65 years, were each forced by circumstances to live with, or near, the child who could provide them with emotional and practical support, that neither spouse abandoned the other, and that their separate living arrangements were necessitated by their advanced age and failing health.

[326]*326We have considered respondent’s remaining contentions and find them unavailing. Concur—Tom, J.P., Buckley, Sweeny and Moskowitz, JJ.

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

The court properly determined that respondent, who was petitioner and decedent’s daughter, did not meet her burden of demonstrating that petitioner abandoned decedent during his lifetime (see Matter of Riefberg, 58 NY2d 134 [1983]; Matter of Maiden, 284 NY 429 [1940]; Matter of Gardner, 176 AD2d 142 [1991], lv dismissed 78 NY2d 1124 [1991]). The evidence established that petitioner and decedent, who had been married for 65 years, were each forced by circumstances to live with, or near, the child who could provide them with emotional and practical support, that neither spouse abandoned the other, and that their separate living arrangements were necessitated by their advanced age and failing health.

[326]*326We have considered respondent’s remaining contentions and find them unavailing. Concur—Tom, J.P., Buckley, Sweeny and Moskowitz, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

49 A.D.3d 325, 853 N.Y.2d 72, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-the-estate-of-arrathoon-nyappdiv-2008.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack