In re the Estate of Gjokaj

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re the Estate of Gjokaj

286 A.D.2d 330, 728 N.Y.S.2d 704, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7874

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided August 6, 2001·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

In a proceeding to judicially settle the account of Pashko Gjokaj, co-administrator of the estate of Tom Gjokaj, a/k/a Tome Gjokaj, a/k/a Thomas Gjokaj, Pashko Gjokaj appeals from an order of the Surrogate’s Court, Nassau County (Radigan, S.), dated March 28, 2000, which denied his petition to vacate a final decree of the same court, dated October 21, 1999, entered upon his default in appearing at trial, directing him to reimburse the decedent’s estate in the sum of $1,653,029.38.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

The Surrogate’s Court providently exercised its discretion in denying the appellant’s motion to vacate the final decree entered upon his default, as he failed to demonstrate a reasonable excuse for his default and the existence of a meritorious defense (see, CPLR 5015 [a] [1]; Roussodimou v Zafiriadis, 238 AD2d 568). Santucci, J. P., Goldstein, Florio and Crane, JJ., concur.

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

In a proceeding to judicially settle the account of Pashko Gjokaj, co-administrator of the estate of Tom Gjokaj, a/k/a Tome Gjokaj, a/k/a Thomas Gjokaj, Pashko Gjokaj appeals from an order of the Surrogate’s Court, Nassau County (Radigan, S.), dated March 28, 2000, which denied his petition to vacate a final decree of the same court, dated October 21, 1999, entered upon his default in appearing at trial, directing him to reimburse the decedent’s estate in the sum of $1,653,029.38.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

The Surrogate’s Court providently exercised its discretion in denying the appellant’s motion to vacate the final decree entered upon his default, as he failed to demonstrate a reasonable excuse for his default and the existence of a meritorious defense (see, CPLR 5015 [a] [1]; Roussodimou v Zafiriadis, 238 AD2d 568). Santucci, J. P., Goldstein, Florio and Crane, JJ., concur.

In re the Estate of Gjokaj, 286 A.D.2d 330, 728 N.Y.S.2d 704, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7874 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2001).

Pincite

286 A.D.2d 330 (In re the Estate of Gjokaj) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related