Published on:

Surrogate’s Court refused to restrain a foreign proceeding, allowing probate to proceed in Israel. Matter of Cohen 2004 NY Slip Op 24426


When attempting to probate a will in New York that originated in another country, several issues may arise. The court must navigate differences in legal systems, questioning the validity of the foreign will under New York law. Considerations include the deceased person’s connection to New York, the residence of beneficiaries, and the executor’s location. The court may assess if the decedent directed probate in New York, weighing the convenience of parties involved. Potential conflicts arise, as the court must balance New York’s interest with the foreign jurisdiction’s primary role in determining the will’s validity. These complexities highlight the importance of careful legal evaluation and the potential need for the court to exercise discretion in deciding whether to accept jurisdiction over the foreign will.

Matter of Cohen 2004 NY Slip Op 24426 involves a dispute among the surviving children of Anna Cohen, who passed away in 1991. The conflict centers on the probate of Anna Cohen’s will in Israel, with Esther Green seeking to challenge the letters of administration granted to her sister, Deb Ireland, in the United States.

Background Facts
Anna Cohen, a resident of Israel, left behind her husband, Meyer Cohen, and three daughters—Esther Green, Deb Ireland, and Bea June Swan. In 2002, Deb Ireland applied for letters of administration, claiming that Anna Cohen was a distributee of her brother’s estate, and the bank overseeing it failed in distribution. Esther Green, residing in Israel, initiated probate proceedings for her mother’s will in 2004, contesting the validity of the will presented by Deb Ireland.

Whether to stop Esther Green from moving forward with the probate case in Israel regarding her mother’s will. This decision hinges on objections raised by Deb Ireland, who questions the validity of the will based on the mother’s mental capacity.

The court denies the application for an injunction to prevent Esther Green from proceeding with the probate case in Israel. The decision is based on several grounds, including procedural defects in the request for injunctive relief, lack of clear right to relief by the administratrix, and doubts about the court’s authority to entertain a petition to deny probate of a foreign will.

The court emphasizes that injunctive relief is a drastic measure, requiring a clear right to relief. It notes the procedural defects in the administratrix’s application and highlights the absence of an affirmative pleading seeking relief. Additionally, the court questions the authority to entertain a petition to deny probate of a foreign will and stresses the importance of considering factors such as domicile, convenience, and potential unjust results.

The court also discusses the doctrine of comity. Comity in the context of wills from a foreign country means that one country respects and recognizes the legal decisions or rules made by another regarding the probate of a will. Even if the laws and procedures are different, comity suggests a level of cooperation and courtesy between the legal systems. It doesn’t mean they have to agree on everything, but it’s a way of acknowledging each other’s decisions and allowing them to have an effect, especially in situations involving wills from another country.

Restraining a foreign proceeding means using legal measures to prevent or stop a case or legal action that has been initiated in another country. The Surrogate’s Court emphasized that restraint of a foreign proceeding is an extraordinary remedy granted only in exceptional circumstances. The administratrix’s claims of fraud, conspiracy, and lack of comprehensive discovery in the Israeli proceedings are deemed unsubstantiated, leading to the rejection of the injunction.

The court denies the application for an injunction, allowing Esther Green to proceed with the probate case in Israel. The decision underscores the need for a clear right to injunctive relief and the importance of comity in international legal proceedings. Handling foreign wills, whether executed in another country or another state, introduces complex legal issues. Individuals facing such matters are advised to seek guidance from an experienced New York probate lawyer. Their expertise can navigate the intricacies of cross-border legal processes, ensuring a thorough understanding of the applicable laws and facilitating a smoother resolution.

Published on:

Comments are closed.

Contact Information