In re the Estate of Winer

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re the Estate of Winer

216 A.D.2d 257, 628 N.Y.S.2d 290, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7105

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

DecidedJune 29, 1995

StatusPublished

This text of 216 A.D.2d 257 (In re the Estate of Winer) 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 Winer, 216 A.D.2d 257, 628 N.Y.S.2d 290, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7105 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1995).

Pincite

Opinion

Decree, Surrogate’s Court, New York County (Eve Preminger, S.), entered on or about September 22, 1994, which granted the petition to compel the executor to pay petitioner funds held in a Totten trust, and order, same court and Surrogate, entered on or about April 8,1994, which denied respondent executor and remainder women’s application for additional disclosure, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The change of account which was undisputedly executed by the decedent, coupled with the deposition testimony and affidavits of the bank officers explaining why the change to a trust in favor of petitioner was not immediately reflected on certain bank statements, were sufficient to establish that a valid Totten trust had been created, and the Surrogate properly concluded that the executor and remainder women had failed to raise a triable issue on the basis of their conclusory assertion that there may have been irregularities in the bank’s handling of the transaction. The court properly exercised its discretion in denying the application for additional disclosure in light of that already obtained and the tenuous basis for the request.

We have considered appellants’ other arguments and find them to be without merit. Concur—Rosenberger, J. P., Kupferman, Asch, Nardelli and Mazzarelli, JJ.

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

Decree, Surrogate’s Court, New York County (Eve Preminger, S.), entered on or about September 22, 1994, which granted the petition to compel the executor to pay petitioner funds held in a Totten trust, and order, same court and Surrogate, entered on or about April 8,1994, which denied respondent executor and remainder women’s application for additional disclosure, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The change of account which was undisputedly executed by the decedent, coupled with the deposition testimony and affidavits of the bank officers explaining why the change to a trust in favor of petitioner was not immediately reflected on certain bank statements, were sufficient to establish that a valid Totten trust had been created, and the Surrogate properly concluded that the executor and remainder women had failed to raise a triable issue on the basis of their conclusory assertion that there may have been irregularities in the bank’s handling of the transaction. The court properly exercised its discretion in denying the application for additional disclosure in light of that already obtained and the tenuous basis for the request.

We have considered appellants’ other arguments and find them to be without merit. Concur—Rosenberger, J. P., Kupferman, Asch, Nardelli and Mazzarelli, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

216 A.D.2d 257, 628 N.Y.S.2d 290, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7105, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-the-estate-of-winer-nyappdiv-1995.