In re the Estate of Fox

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re the Estate of Fox

233 A.D.2d 396, 650 N.Y.S.2d 581, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11517

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

DecidedNovember 12, 1996

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 233 A.D.2d 396 (In re the Estate of Fox) 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 Fox, 233 A.D.2d 396, 650 N.Y.S.2d 581, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11517 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1996).

Pincite

Opinion

In a probate proceeding, the executor appeals, as limited by his brief, from so much of an order of the Surrogate’s Court, Nassau County (Radigan, S.), dated November 19, 1993, as, upon reargument, adhered to its original determination granting applications by estate beneficiaries for partial distributions from the estate of Natalie N. Fox.

Ordered that the order is°affirmed insofar as appealed from, without costs or disbursements.

[397]*397The Surrogate did not err in its granting the applications for partial distributions where the record reflected that there were sufficient assets in the estate to meet the requirements of SCPA 2102 (see also, Matter of Cassidy, 268 App Div 633; Matter of Morris, 151 Misc 325).

The executor’s remaining contentions are either unpreserved for appellate review or without merit. Rosenblatt, J. P., Pizzuto, Friedmann and Goldstein, JJ., concur.

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

In a probate proceeding, the executor appeals, as limited by his brief, from so much of an order of the Surrogate’s Court, Nassau County (Radigan, S.), dated November 19, 1993, as, upon reargument, adhered to its original determination granting applications by estate beneficiaries for partial distributions from the estate of Natalie N. Fox.

Ordered that the order is°affirmed insofar as appealed from, without costs or disbursements.

[397]*397The Surrogate did not err in its granting the applications for partial distributions where the record reflected that there were sufficient assets in the estate to meet the requirements of SCPA 2102 (see also, Matter of Cassidy, 268 App Div 633; Matter of Morris, 151 Misc 325).

The executor’s remaining contentions are either unpreserved for appellate review or without merit. Rosenblatt, J. P., Pizzuto, Friedmann and Goldstein, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

233 A.D.2d 396, 650 N.Y.S.2d 581, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11517, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-the-estate-of-fox-nyappdiv-1996.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack