In re the Estate of Mirizzi

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re the Estate of Mirizzi

291 A.D.2d 451, 737 N.Y.S.2d 542, 2002 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1629

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

DecidedFebruary 11, 2002

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 291 A.D.2d 451 (In re the Estate of Mirizzi) 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 Mirizzi, 291 A.D.2d 451, 737 N.Y.S.2d 542, 2002 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1629 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2002).

Pincite

Opinion

—In a proceeding pursuant to SCPA 1420 for the construction of the will of Giuseppe Mirizzi, Sonia Mirizzi appeals, as limited by her brief, from so much of an order of the Surrogate’s Court, Richmond County (Fusco, S.), dated April 20, 2001, as granted the petition and determined that she was not entitled to share in the decedent’s estate.

Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs payable by the appellant personally.

Approximately two months before his death, the decedent and the appellant entered into a stipulation of settlement in [452]*452their matrimonial action. Contrary to the appellant’s contention, that stipulation contained language manifesting the parties’ intent to waive their rights as beneficiaries under each other’s wills (see, Matter of Maruccia, 54 NY2d 196; Matter of Stiles, 233 AD2d 888).

In light of our determination, we do not reach the appellant’s remaining contention. Florio, J.P., Feuerstein, O’Brien and Adams, JJ., concur.

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

—In a proceeding pursuant to SCPA 1420 for the construction of the will of Giuseppe Mirizzi, Sonia Mirizzi appeals, as limited by her brief, from so much of an order of the Surrogate’s Court, Richmond County (Fusco, S.), dated April 20, 2001, as granted the petition and determined that she was not entitled to share in the decedent’s estate.

Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs payable by the appellant personally.

Approximately two months before his death, the decedent and the appellant entered into a stipulation of settlement in [452]*452their matrimonial action. Contrary to the appellant’s contention, that stipulation contained language manifesting the parties’ intent to waive their rights as beneficiaries under each other’s wills (see, Matter of Maruccia, 54 NY2d 196; Matter of Stiles, 233 AD2d 888).

In light of our determination, we do not reach the appellant’s remaining contention. Florio, J.P., Feuerstein, O’Brien and Adams, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

291 A.D.2d 451, 737 N.Y.S.2d 542, 2002 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1629, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-the-estate-of-mirizzi-nyappdiv-2002.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack