In re the Estate of Henderson

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re the Estate of Henderson

287 A.D.2d 716, 732 N.Y.S.2d 53, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10103

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

DecidedOctober 29, 2001

StatusPublished

This text of 287 A.D.2d 716 (In re the Estate of Henderson) 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 Henderson, 287 A.D.2d 716, 732 N.Y.S.2d 53, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10103 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2001).

Pincite

Opinion

—In a proceeding to settle the account of the executor of the estate of James A. Henderson, the executor appeals from so much of an order of the Surrogate’s Court, Suffolk County (Weber, S.), dated May 8, 2000, as denied his motion for summary judgment dismissing the objections to the account.

Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.

The Surrogate properly determined that the proceeds from the executor’s sale of a parcel of real property which had been titled in the decedent’s name alone constituted estate assets (see, Matter of Zahoudanis, 205 AD2d 547; cf., Matter of Moody, 125 AD2d 673). Moreover, the Surrogate properly determined that questions of fact exist as to the order of priority of the claims being made against the estate, as well as to the reasonableness of the amounts being claimed. Ritter, J. P., Santucci, Feuerstein and Adams, JJ., concur.

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

—In a proceeding to settle the account of the executor of the estate of James A. Henderson, the executor appeals from so much of an order of the Surrogate’s Court, Suffolk County (Weber, S.), dated May 8, 2000, as denied his motion for summary judgment dismissing the objections to the account.

Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.

The Surrogate properly determined that the proceeds from the executor’s sale of a parcel of real property which had been titled in the decedent’s name alone constituted estate assets (see, Matter of Zahoudanis, 205 AD2d 547; cf., Matter of Moody, 125 AD2d 673). Moreover, the Surrogate properly determined that questions of fact exist as to the order of priority of the claims being made against the estate, as well as to the reasonableness of the amounts being claimed. Ritter, J. P., Santucci, Feuerstein and Adams, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

287 A.D.2d 716, 732 N.Y.S.2d 53, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10103, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-the-estate-of-henderson-nyappdiv-2001.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack