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

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided January 28, 1985·Published·Cited by 2 cases

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.

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

107 A.D.2d 811 (In re the Estate of Steinberg) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related