In re the Estate of Freeman

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re the Estate of Freeman

170 A.D.2d 986, 566 N.Y.S.2d 902, 1991 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1712

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

DecidedFebruary 1, 1991

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 170 A.D.2d 986 (In re the Estate of Freeman) 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 Freeman, 170 A.D.2d 986, 566 N.Y.S.2d 902, 1991 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1712 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1991).

Pincite

Opinion

Order unanimously affirmed without costs. Memorandum: The Surrogate’s Court did not lack either subject matter or personal jurisdiction to revoke petitioner’s letters of administration (see, SCPA 201, 203, 711 [4]; 719 [10]). The decision to revoke such letters pursuant to SCPA 719 (10) rests within the discretion of the Surrogate’s Court and, based upon the record before us, it cannot be said that the court abused its discretion in revoking petitioner’s letters (see, Matter of Menis, 137 AD2d 692, 693). Accordingly, the petition to vacate the judgment revoking petitioner’s letters was properly dismissed. (Appeal from Order of Erie County Surrogate’s Court, Mattina, S.—Vacate Judgment.) Present—Doerr, J. P., Boomer, Green, Pine and Davis, JJ.

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

Order unanimously affirmed without costs. Memorandum: The Surrogate’s Court did not lack either subject matter or personal jurisdiction to revoke petitioner’s letters of administration (see, SCPA 201, 203, 711 [4]; 719 [10]). The decision to revoke such letters pursuant to SCPA 719 (10) rests within the discretion of the Surrogate’s Court and, based upon the record before us, it cannot be said that the court abused its discretion in revoking petitioner’s letters (see, Matter of Menis, 137 AD2d 692, 693). Accordingly, the petition to vacate the judgment revoking petitioner’s letters was properly dismissed. (Appeal from Order of Erie County Surrogate’s Court, Mattina, S.—Vacate Judgment.) Present—Doerr, J. P., Boomer, Green, Pine and Davis, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

170 A.D.2d 986, 566 N.Y.S.2d 902, 1991 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1712, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-the-estate-of-freeman-nyappdiv-1991.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack