Matter of Duzhansky

2017 NY Slip Op 6270, 153 A.D.3d 819, 57 N.Y.S.3d 905
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedAugust 23, 2017
Docket2016-10910
StatusPublished

This text of 2017 NY Slip Op 6270 (Matter of Duzhansky) 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
Matter of Duzhansky, 2017 NY Slip Op 6270, 153 A.D.3d 819, 57 N.Y.S.3d 905 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2017).

Opinion

In a contested probate proceeding, the objectant Regina Duzhanskja appeals from so much of an order of the Surrogate’s Court, Kings County (Lopez Torres, S.), dated August 2, 2016, as denied that branch of her motion which was to expand discovery beyond the time period set forth in 22 NYCRR 207.27 with respect to certain medical records of the decedent.

Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.

The applicable Uniform Rules for the Surrogate’s Court confines discovery to “a three-year period prior to the date of the propounded instrument and two years thereafter, or to the date of [the] decedent’s death, whichever is the shorter period,” except upon “the showing of special circumstances” (22 NYCRR 207.27). The determination of whether to expand the time period set forth in that rule is within the discretion of the court (see Matter of Constant, 128 AD3d 419 [2015]).

Here, contrary to the objectant’s contention, the Surrogate’s Court providently exercised its discretion in denying that branch of her motion which was to expand discovery beyond the time period set forth in 22 NYCRR 207.27 with respect to certain medical records of the decedent. The objectant failed to demonstrate that there were special circumstances warranting expansion of the time period set forth in that rule (see Matter of Wilson, 266 AD2d 164 [1999]).

Rivera, J.R, Leventhal, Austin and Christopher, JJ., concur.

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

Related

In Re the Estate of Constant
128 A.D.3d 419 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2015)
In re the Estate of Wilson
266 A.D.2d 164 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1999)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
2017 NY Slip Op 6270, 153 A.D.3d 819, 57 N.Y.S.3d 905, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/matter-of-duzhansky-nyappdiv-2017.