In re the Estate of Levine

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re the Estate of Levine

262 A.D.2d 80, 692 N.Y.S.2d 32, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6458

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

DecidedJune 10, 1999

StatusPublished

Cited by5 cases

This text of 262 A.D.2d 80 (In re the Estate of Levine) 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 Levine, 262 A.D.2d 80, 692 N.Y.S.2d 32, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6458 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1999).

Pincite

Opinion

—Order, Surrogate’s Court, New York County (Renee Roth, S.), entered on or about January 20, 1998, which granted petitioner attorney’s application pursuant to SCPA 2110 for legal fees against respondent former client to the extent of awarding a fee of $40,000, unanimously affirmed, with costs.

Where an attorney is hired by a client who is both a cofiduciary and legatee of an estate, and performs services that benefit both the estate and the individual interests of the client, the Surrogate has jurisdiction, and indeed is in the best position, to parse the two types of services, and make an award against the client personally for the services that furthered only the client’s interests as either a legatee or as a challenged cofiduciary whose conduct was found to be against the interests of the estate and resulted in his removal (NY Const, art VI, § 12 [d]; see, Rosenman & Colin v Winston, 205 AD2d 451). Upon review of the record, the $40,000 award is an accurate assessment of the reasonable value of the services performed by petitioner for respondent as either a legatee or challenged cofiduciary. We have considered respondent’s other arguments and find them to be unavailing. Concur — Ellerin, P. J., Nardelli, Mazzarelli, Rubin and Saxe, JJ.

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

—Order, Surrogate’s Court, New York County (Renee Roth, S.), entered on or about January 20, 1998, which granted petitioner attorney’s application pursuant to SCPA 2110 for legal fees against respondent former client to the extent of awarding a fee of $40,000, unanimously affirmed, with costs.

Where an attorney is hired by a client who is both a cofiduciary and legatee of an estate, and performs services that benefit both the estate and the individual interests of the client, the Surrogate has jurisdiction, and indeed is in the best position, to parse the two types of services, and make an award against the client personally for the services that furthered only the client’s interests as either a legatee or as a challenged cofiduciary whose conduct was found to be against the interests of the estate and resulted in his removal (NY Const, art VI, § 12 [d]; see, Rosenman & Colin v Winston, 205 AD2d 451). Upon review of the record, the $40,000 award is an accurate assessment of the reasonable value of the services performed by petitioner for respondent as either a legatee or challenged cofiduciary. We have considered respondent’s other arguments and find them to be unavailing. Concur — Ellerin, P. J., Nardelli, Mazzarelli, Rubin and Saxe, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

262 A.D.2d 80, 692 N.Y.S.2d 32, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6458, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-the-estate-of-levine-nyappdiv-1999.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack