Articles Posted in Estate Administration

Published on:

by

This case involves the distribution of settlement proceeds following the untimely death of the decedent, raising questions of jurisdiction and allocation between personal injury and wrongful death claims. The petitioner, Clathina McMillan-Hoyte, seeks approval for the distribution, while the Albany County Department of Social Services (DSS) objects, asserting a Medicaid lien on the personal injury portion.

In New York, the allocation between personal injury and wrongful death claims involves a determination of how to distribute settlement proceeds.  Recoveries designated for wrongful death, governed by EPTL 5-4.4, are distributed among the decedent’s distributees according to their pecuniary injuries. This process aims to prevent creditors from accessing funds allocated to wrongful death, emphasizing the distinct nature of these claims. Such allocations are subject to careful legal scrutiny, providing a framework for just and equitable distribution in cases involving both personal injury and wrongful death.

Background Facts

Published on:

by

In estate proceedings, the involvement of corporate holdings, like a company owned by the deceased, can significantly affect the distribution of assets. Imagine someone owned a business worth millions when they passed away. Now, their estate has to be sorted out. The company’s value and income become part of the estate’s total worth. If there are specific legal matters or disputes, details about the company, its finances, and decisions made in board meetings may become crucial.

In the case of Phebe Baugher, her estate involved about $22 million linked to W.S. Wilson Corporation. So, understanding how the company operated, especially after Phebe’s death, becomes vital. Jonathan Kirk Baugher, managing the estate’s initial steps, wanted more information about what happened in meetings after 2008, likely to ensure everything was handled correctly. This shows how the corporate side of things can be tightly connected to the overall estate proceedings. The court’s decision on accessing specific corporate records can significantly impact how the estate is managed and how assets are eventually distributed among heirs.

Background Facts

Published on:

by
A New York small estate proceeding is a simplified legal process for handling the assets of a deceased person when their estate is relatively small. It streamlines the probate or administration process, making it quicker and less complex. Typically, it’s available when the total value of the estate is below a certain threshold. This procedure helps heirs and beneficiaries access the deceased person’s assets more efficiently, minimizing the legal requirements and costs associated with a standard probate or administration process for larger estates.

In this small estate proceeding, the petitioner seeks access to his deceased spouse’s Google email, contacts, and calendar information under Article 13 of the Surrogate’s Court Procedure Act (SCPA). The request aims to inform friends of the passing and address any pending matters. However, Google insists on a court order ensuring compliance with privacy laws.

Background Facts

by
Published on:
Updated:
Published on:

by

Matter of Maier, 178 Misc. 2d 1061 (N.Y. Surr. Ct. 1998) is about a wrongful death compromise proceeding and sheds light on the nuanced intersection of personal injury law, estate distribution, and the role of social services.

Wrongful death actions arise when an individual’s death is caused by the wrongful act, neglect, or default of another party. For example, if someone is killed in car accident because another driver rain through a red light, a wrongful action could be brought against the negligent driver. Or, as in Matter of Maier, a death due to medical malpractice. Typically, these actions are initiated by the decedent’s personal representative or the estate on behalf of surviving family members who have experienced damages due to the death.

A distinctive aspect of a wrongful death compromise lies in the necessity to determine not only the amount of money to be awarded to the plaintiff (if any) but also how these funds are to be allocated. In a wrongful death compromise, the court must ascertain the monetary awards attributed to wrongful death versus personal injury. Damages attributable to wrongful death are granted exclusively to the decedent’s distributees, recognizing their compensation for the loss incurred due to their dependence on the deceased individual. Conversely, damages attributed to personal injury and pain and suffering are allocated through the estate. Subsequently, these funds are distributed in accordance with the terms specified in the decedent’s will or based on the laws of intestate succession.

by
Published on:
Updated:
Published on:

by

Matter of Dillon, 2017 NY Slip Op 27388 involves the estate of Terry J. Dillon, who died intestate in Maryland in 2016. A Small Estate Petition was filed in Maryland, where the decedent’s son, Jason M. Dillon, was appointed as the personal representative. Subsequently, Jason filed a petition in New York for ancillary letters of administration due to the decedent’s real estate holdings in the state.

Ancillary administration in New York refers to the legal process when someone passes away with assets in New York but is not a resident of New York. According to SCPA §1601, this process allows the executor, who manages the primary estate in the decedent’s domicile, to obtain additional authority to handle assets in New York. It ensures a proper and coordinated settlement of the deceased person’s affairs, even if their primary estate proceedings occur in a different jurisdiction. Ancillary administration follows the statutes outlined in SCPA §1309 and SCPA §206, ensuring compliance with New York estate laws.

Background Facts

by
Published on:
Updated:
Published on:

by

Cases involving wrongful death settlements can be quite complex, as demonstrated in the case of In re Torres, 28 Misc. 3d 677 (N.Y. Surr. Ct. 2010) , involving the New York City Department of Social Services (DSS).

Wrongful death occurs when an individual dies due to the negligent or intentional actions of another party. This legal concept allows surviving family members to seek compensation for their losses resulting from the death. A wrongful death claim typically arises when the deceased would have had a personal injury claim had they survived.

A wrongful death compromise proceeding seeks to determine who to allocate money awarded as a result of the death. The money can be designated as based on a wrongful death claim or a personal injury claim. The damages awarded for wrongful death are meant for the pecuniary losses suffered by the decedent’s distributees, whereas personal injury damages might include compensation for the decedent’s conscious pain and suffering. Proper allocation ensures the right parties receive the appropriate compensation.

Published on:

by

This case involves a petition by Clathina McMillan-Hoyte, as the Administrator of the Estate of Henderson T. Hoyte, seeking approval for the allocation and distribution of settlement proceeds. The matter arises from the allocation of 100% of the settlement to wrongful death, a decision challenged by the Albany County Department of Social Services (DSS). This blog will delve into the background facts, the key issue of jurisdiction, the court’s holding, a brief discussion of relevant legal principles, and a conclusion.

This case involves a wrongful death.  Wrongful death refers to a legal claim arising when a person dies due to the negligence, intentional actions, or misconduct of another party. For example, if someone dies due to medical malpractice, the decedent’s survivors and/or estate made have a claim against the negligent medical professional. This cause of action allows the surviving family members or beneficiaries to seek compensation for the losses they suffered as a result of the decedent’s death.

When a wrongful death claim results in a monetary award, the court must determine during a wrongful death compromise proceeding, if the award is for wrongful death or for personal injury. This is a critical determination because it determines who is actually entitled to the money. If the money is awarded for wrongful death, the decedent’s next of kin would be entitled to receive it.  However, if the money is for personal injury, then the decedent’ estate would be entitled to receive it. The money would go through the probate process and would ultimately be distributed based on the decedent’s will or intestate succession.

Published on:

by
In re Horn, 68 Misc. 3d 1217 (N.Y. Surr. Ct. 2020), the dispute revolves around the Last Will and Testament dated January 15, 2019, including a claim related to the testamentary capacity of the testator. Testamentary capacity is crucial in ensuring the validity of a person’s will. It reflects the mental and emotional state of the testator, verifying their ability to comprehend the nature of their assets, understand the consequences of their decisions, and identify rightful beneficiaries. Establishing testamentary capacity safeguards against potential exploitation, fraud, or undue influence. A sound mind during will creation ensures that the document truly represents the individual’s intentions. Without testamentary capacity, the legitimacy of the will may be questioned, leading to legal disputes and jeopardizing the deceased’s final wishes. Thus, testamentary capacity is indispensable for maintaining the integrity of the probate process.

Factual Background

Russell L. Van Horn passed away on January 19, 2019, leaving a contested last will and testament dated January 15, 2019 (the “January 15th Will”). While hospitalized due to cancer at Orange Regional Medical Center, Decedent’s nephew, Kiel Van Horn, drafted a will on January 14, 2019 (the “January 14th Will”), incorporating handwritten changes made by the Decedent. The January 14th Will bequeathed property and assets to family members, including a 1/5 share of the estate residue to Objectant Tammy Long. On January 15, 2019, Kiel Van Horn created the January 15th Will, revoking the previous version. Objectant Long contests the January 15th Will, alleging lack of capacity, duress, undue influence, or fraud.

Published on:

by

Delrossi v. Defendant V, 2004 N.Y. Slip Op. 24462 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. 2005) is a complicated case that spans over two decades. The intricacies of this legal battle, involving issues of wrongful death, survivorship claims, and reimbursement rights, present a fascinating study in the interplay between state and federal laws. The case begins as a wrongful death case based on malpractice.  Ultimately, there is a fight over who is entitled to the money from the wrongful death claim.

When someone dies due to the negligence of another person, a wrongful death claim can be filed against the negligent parties to recover damages.  Through a wrongful death compromise proceeding, the court determines if the damages are for wrongful death or for personal injury.

Background Facts

Published on:

by
In re Demesyeux, 978 N.Y.S.2d 608 (N.Y. Surr. Ct. 2013) the Surrogate’s Court considered an issue related to the wrongful deaths of 3 children and who was entitled to receive benefit from the proceeds of a wrongful death lawsuit. The case was tragic, as it involved a mother who suffered from mental illness, killing her three young children. While typically the parents would be a minor child’s next of kin, entitled them to share in any wrongful death compensation awarded, this case was unique because one of the parents caused the wrongful death of the children.

Background Facts

Leatrice Brewer confessed to drowning her three children aged 1, 5, and 6, in the bathtub of her New Cassel apartment on Long Island in February 2008. After drowning them, Brewer placed the lifeless bodies of her children on a bed and attempted to end her own life by swallowing a toxic concoction of household cleaning chemicals. When this attempt failed to claim her life, Brewer resorted to jumping out of her second-story window. She survived.

Contact Information