In re the Estate of Steinberg

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re the Estate of Steinberg

107 A.D.2d 811, 484 N.Y.S.2d 647, 1985 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 42731

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

DecidedJanuary 28, 1985

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 107 A.D.2d 811 (In re the Estate of Steinberg) 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 Steinberg, 107 A.D.2d 811, 484 N.Y.S.2d 647, 1985 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 42731 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1985).

Pincite

Opinion

In a proceeding pursuant to SCPA 2103, the appeal is from a decree of the Surrogate’s Court, Queens County (Laurino, S.), dated July 5, 1983, which, after a nonjury trial, inter alia, adjudged that the proceeds, with accrued interest thereon, of two bank accounts constitute assets of the decedent’s estate.

Decree affirmed, with costs, payable by appellant personally.

Upon our review of the record, we find that decedent’s lack of capacity at the time the two joint bank accounts in question were created was established by clear and convincing evidence. The record further supports the Surrogate’s determination that appellant abused the confidential relationship he enjoyed with decedent and that appellant’s testimony was not credible. Accordingly, the Surrogate properly decreed that the proceeds of the two accounts constitute assets of the estate (see Banking Law, § 675; Allen v La Vaud, 213 NY 322; Matter of Poggemeyer, 87 AD2d 822). Titone, J. P., Mangano, Gibbons and O’Connor, JJ., concur.

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

In a proceeding pursuant to SCPA 2103, the appeal is from a decree of the Surrogate’s Court, Queens County (Laurino, S.), dated July 5, 1983, which, after a nonjury trial, inter alia, adjudged that the proceeds, with accrued interest thereon, of two bank accounts constitute assets of the decedent’s estate.

Decree affirmed, with costs, payable by appellant personally.

Upon our review of the record, we find that decedent’s lack of capacity at the time the two joint bank accounts in question were created was established by clear and convincing evidence. The record further supports the Surrogate’s determination that appellant abused the confidential relationship he enjoyed with decedent and that appellant’s testimony was not credible. Accordingly, the Surrogate properly decreed that the proceeds of the two accounts constitute assets of the estate (see Banking Law, § 675; Allen v La Vaud, 213 NY 322; Matter of Poggemeyer, 87 AD2d 822). Titone, J. P., Mangano, Gibbons and O’Connor, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

107 A.D.2d 811, 484 N.Y.S.2d 647, 1985 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 42731, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-the-estate-of-steinberg-nyappdiv-1985.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack