Matter of DeLine

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided July 24, 2026·No. 500 CA 25-00326·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

Matter of DeLine

2026 NY Slip Op 04674

July 24, 2026

Appellate Division, Fourth Department

Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431.

This decision is uncorrected and subject to revision before publication in the Official Reports.

WILLIAM J. DELINE, JR., DECEASED. -------------------------------------------------- JAY DELINE AND TIM DELINE, PETITIONERS-APPELLANTS, JILL SEARS, VICKIE FLANAGAN AND CHARLES L. FALGIATANO, RESPONDENTS-RESPONDENTS.

Supreme Court of the State of New York, Appellate Division, Fourth Judicial Department

Decided on July 24, 2026

500 CA 25-00326

Present: Bannister, J.P., Montour, Greenwood, Delconte, And Hannah, JJ.

CROSSMORE & TIFFANY, ITHACA (EDWARD Y. CROSSMORE OF COUNSEL), FOR PETITIONERS-APPELLANTS.

D.J. & J.A. CIRANDO, PLLC, SYRACUSE (JOHN A. CIRANDO OF COUNSEL), FOR RESPONDENTS-RESPONDENTS.

Appeal from a decree (denominated order) of the Surrogate's Court, Onondaga County (Mary Keib Smith, S.), entered January 23, 2025, in a proceeding to compel an accounting of a credit trust and construe a will. The decree dismissed the petition.

[*1]

It is hereby ORDERED that the decree so appealed from is unanimously affirmed without costs.

Memorandum: Petitioners commenced this proceeding to compel an accounting of a credit trust and construe the will of their deceased father, whose will established the credit trust for the benefit of petitioners' mother, now deceased. The father's will granted the mother a limited power of appointment of the remainder of the credit trust. The mother exercised the power of appointment in her will and distributed the remaining assets of the credit trust to her daughters and not petitioners.

Contrary to petitioners' contention, Surrogate's Court properly granted the motion of respondents Jill Sears and Vickie Flanagan to dismiss the petition on the ground that petitioners lacked standing. Pursuant to SCPA 2205 (1), a court may, upon appearing that it is for the best interests of the estate, make an order requiring a fiduciary to file an intermediate or final account. The court may do so either on its own initiative or on the petition of, inter alia, "a person interested" (SCPA 2205 [2]). SCPA 103 (39) defines "[p]erson interested" as "[a]ny person entitled or allegedly entitled to share as beneficiary in the estate or the trustee in bankruptcy or receiver of such person" (see Matter of Clifford, 204 AD3d 1397, 1398 [4th Dept 2022]).

Here, the Surrogate properly concluded that petitioners were not beneficiaries of the credit trust and thus lacked standing as a matter of law (see Clifford, 204 AD3d at 1398; Dineen v Pratt, 155 AD3d 610, 610 [2d Dept 2017]). We have considered petitioners' remaining contentions and conclude that they lack merit.

Entered: July 24, 2026

Ann Dillon Flynn

Clerk of the Court

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

Matter of DeLine, (N.Y. Ct. App. 2026).

Matter of DeLine (Matter of DeLine) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Dineen v. Pratt
2017 NY Slip Op 7590 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2017)