New York Probate and Estate Administration Lawyer Blog
A person’s residence and legal domicile are not always the same. This distinction can become important in estate administration because a Surrogate’s Court generally has jurisdiction based on the decedent’s domicile at the time of death.
In Matter of Schellbach, the Nassau County Surrogate’s Court considered whether it could issue letters of administration where the decedent had spent her final years living in nursing facilities outside Nassau County.
Background
Elizabeth D. Schellbach died in December 2016. She was survived by her five children. Before her death, she had signed a will in 1998. However, the original will could not be located after her attorneys reported that it was missing. Although one of her sons had a copy of the will, the family chose not to pursue probate of a lost will. Instead, they filed a petition asking the Nassau County Surrogate’s Court to issue letters of administration.
The approach was unusual but practical because the decedent’s distributees and the beneficiaries under the copy of the will agreed to proceed with an administration, and everyone consented to the photocopy of the will not being admitted to probate. The remaining issue was whether Nassau County was the proper court to handle the estate.
Issue
Did the Nassau County Surrogate’s Court have jurisdiction to issue letters of administration even though the decedent had been living in Connecticut when she died?
Holding
Yes. The court concluded that the decedent remained domiciled in Nassau County and issued letters of administration.
Discussion
The decedent had lived in her Manhasset home for more than 40 years before advancing age and declining health required her to move into nursing facilities. She first lived in a New York facility and later in a Connecticut facility, where she remained until her death.
The petitioner argued that these moves did not change the decedent’s legal domicile. He pointed out that she had not chosen to relocate, but had been moved by her representatives because of her medical condition. He also noted that she continued to maintain connections to Nassau County, including voting there, maintaining local bank accounts, keeping personal property in a Nassau County safe deposit box, and remaining involved with local religious and civic organizations.
The court explained that domicile is a person’s fixed and permanent home. A domicile is not changed simply because someone lives elsewhere for medical reasons. Instead, there must be evidence that the person intended to establish a new permanent home.
The court also noted that an incapacitated person’s admission to a nursing facility generally does not change that person’s domicile if the individual cannot form the intent to establish a new one.
Here, there was no evidence that the decedent intended to make Connecticut her permanent home. Although she died there and her death certificate listed the Connecticut facility as her residence, there was no proof that she ever intended to abandon Nassau County as her domicile.
Because the evidence showed that her move resulted from health concerns rather than a voluntary decision to establish a new permanent home, the court concluded that her domicile remained in Nassau County.
The court therefore held that the Nassau County Surrogate’s Court had jurisdiction to issue letters of administration. It also waived the requirement that the petitioner post a bond because all interested parties had consented.
Conclusion
Matter of Schellbach illustrates that where a person dies is not always the same as where that person’s estate should be administered. A move to a nursing home or long-term care facility, even in another state, does not automatically change a person’s legal domicile. The court will instead examine whether the decedent intended to establish a new permanent home. Anyone facing a jurisdictional issue involving estate administration should consult an experienced Nassau County probate lawyer to determine the proper Surrogate’s Court for the proceeding.