New York Probate and Estate Administration Lawyer Blog

Nassau County Surrogate’s Court Retained Jurisdiction Despite Decedent’s Final Years in Connecticut: Matter of Schellbach, 2017 NY Slip Op 32059(U)

Stephen Bilkis — Mon, 20 Jul 2026 14:28:22 +0000

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

Grandchild Granted Letters of Administration Despite Daughter’s Objection: Matter of Dinger, 2017 NY Slip Op 04115

Stephen Bilkis — Thu, 16 Jul 2026 02:45:39 +0000

When someone dies without a valid will, the Surrogate’s Court must appoint someone to administer the estate. That person is called an administrator. The administrator collects estate assets, pays debts, and distributes what remains to the people legally entitled to inherit. In Matter of Dinger, the Richmond County Surrogate’s Court had to decide who should receive letters of administration where the decedent’s surviving daughter objected to the petition filed by the decedent’s grandson.

Background

May Dinger died in 2012. She was survived by one daughter. Her grandson, David Thompson, Jr., was the son of May’s daughter who had died before her. In 2014, the grandson filed a petition asking the Surrogate’s Court for letters of administration. Letters of administration are the court papers that give someone legal authority to manage an estate when there is no valid will. The surviving daughter opposed the petition and moved to dismiss it. She claimed, among other things, that there was a will and that the grandson should not be appointed. The daughter submitted a copy of what she claimed was May Dinger’s will. However, she refused to offer the original will for probate. The Surrogate’s Court denied the daughter’s motion and directed that letters of administration be issued to the grandson. The daughter appealed.

Joint Accounts Treated as Estate Property When Created for Convenience: Matter of Cooper, 2004 NY Slip Op 51697(U)

Stephen Bilkis — Mon, 13 Jul 2026 14:23:39 +0000

Adding another person’s name to a bank or investment account does not always mean that person owns the money after the original owner’s death. Sometimes a joint account is created only so that a trusted relative can help pay bills or manage finances. In Matter of Cooper, the Nassau County Surrogate’s Court considered whether several accounts held in the names of a mother and daughter passed automatically to the daughter or remained part of the mother’s estate.

Background

Felicia Cooper died in 2002, survived by her two children, Judith Gilman and Edward Cooper.

Estate Beneficiaries May Consent to Executor Commissions Despite Will Waiver: Matter of Goldberg, 2008 NY Slip Op 28534

Stephen Bilkis — Wed, 08 Jul 2026 13:38:09 +0000

Executors are generally entitled to receive compensation for administering an estate under New York law. In most cases, that compensation is calculated according to a statutory formula based on the value of the probate estate. However, a will may provide that the executor is to serve without compensation. Matter of Goldberg presented the question of whether an executor could receive statutory commissions when the will expressly prohibited payment, but all of the beneficiaries agreed that the executor should nevertheless be compensated.

Background

Bruce Goldberg died in 2007, leaving a will that was admitted to probate in Nassau County. The will named Steven Ostrer as executor. It also contained a provision stating that anyone serving as executor or trustee, including an attorney, would not be paid for performing those duties.

Trustee Cannot Be Removed Based Solely on Disagreements Over Trust Administration: Matter of Damiano, 2026 NY Slip Op 00297

Stephen Bilkis — Tue, 07 Jul 2026 16:09:14 +0000

A trustee is responsible for managing trust property, making distributions to beneficiaries when appropriate, and carrying out the wishes of the person who created the trust. Although beneficiaries may disagree with a trustee’s decisions, not every disagreement is grounds for removal. In Matter of Damiano, the Appellate Division, Third Department, considered when a New York court may remove a trustee and what evidence is required to justify that decision.

Background

Jennifer Damiano created separate trusts for her two children through her will. The trusts were to hold the children’s inheritance until each child reached age 25. She appointed a close friend as trustee and gave the trustee broad authority to manage the trust assets, make investments, approve distributions, and hire attorneys when necessary.

Estate Co-Owner Could Not Eject Fellow Beneficiaries Without Showing Sale Was Necessary for Estate Administration: Matter of Pisarik (Roma), 2024 NY Slip Op 50363(U)

Stephen Bilkis — Mon, 06 Jul 2026 12:45:05 +0000

The Queens County Surrogate’s Court considered whether an executor could evict fellow beneficiaries from estate property in order to sell the property. In Matter of Pisarik, the court examined the limits of an executor’s authority when beneficiaries become co-owners of inherited real estate and whether estate administration justified removing those occupants from the property.

Background

Michael Roma died in 2022, leaving a will that was later admitted to probate. His primary asset was a two-family home located in Corona, Queens. Under the residuary clause of the will, the property passed in equal shares to the decedent’s niece, Ramona Taveras Pisarik, who also served as executor, and to the decedent’s longtime tenants and friends, Maria Castillo and Santo Castillo.

Bank That Wrongfully Released Estate Funds Could Not Undo Default Judgment: Matter of Rosenblatt (Kozerska), 2026 NY Slip Op 50969(U)

Stephen Bilkis — Fri, 03 Jul 2026 13:16:27 +0000

When someone dies, money held in the person’s bank accounts does not automatically become available to family members. In most cases, the bank must wait until an executor or administrator has been appointed and presents the appropriate court-issued authority, such as Letters Testamentary or Letters of Administration, before releasing estate funds. If a bank distributes money without proper authority, it may be required to repay the estate. In Matter of Rosenblatt, the Queens County Surrogate’s Court considered whether a bank could set aside a default judgment entered against it after it failed to respond to a turnover proceeding seeking the return of estate funds.

Background

Pauline Kozerska died in January 2020. She had two bank accounts at JPMorgan Chase Bank. Although the accounts had originally been opened jointly with her father, he had died several years earlier, making Ms. Kozerska the sole owner.

Court Rules That a Fiduciary Cannot Be Removed Based on Disputed Kinship Claims Alone. Matter of Micka (Rivera), 2026 NY Slip Op 50331(U) (Sur. Ct. Putnam County Mar. 6, 2026)

Stephen Bilkis — Tue, 30 Jun 2026 22:13:05 +0000

Estate administration often depends on accurately identifying a deceased person’s heirs. When questions arise about whether all potential distributees were disclosed during an administration proceeding, Surrogate’s Courts may be asked to determine whether a fiduciary obtained appointment through a material misrepresentation and whether removal is warranted. In Matter of Micka (Rivera), the Putnam County Surrogate’s Court considered whether letters of administration should be revoked after a purported half-nephew claimed that the administrator failed to identify him and other potential heirs during the original administration proceeding.

Background facts

Zita Rivera died intestate in October 2023 at age 63. She was unmarried, had no children, and was survived by her brother, Richard Rivera. In February 2024, the Surrogate’s Court issued letters of administration to Richard Rivera based on a petition that identified him as the decedent’s sole distributee.

Court Rules That Proof of Kinship Is the Core Issue in a Disputed Administration Petition, Matter of Barasch, 32 Misc. 2d 548 (Sur. Ct. Nassau County 1962)

Stephen Bilkis — Mon, 29 Jun 2026 22:22:26 +0000

Estate administration depends on accurate information being provided to the Surrogate’s Court. When someone seeks appointment as an administrator, the petition must correctly identify the decedent’s heirs and other interested parties. If later evidence suggests that information in the petition was incorrect, questions may arise about whether the fiduciary’s appointment should be revoked. In Matter of Barasch, the Nassau County Surrogate’s Court addressed whether an administratrix could retain her appointment when another individual claimed to be the decedent’s surviving spouse and argued that the original petition contained a false statement regarding kinship.

Background facts

The proceeding arose after letters of administration had been issued in the estate of Herman Barasch. The petitioner claimed to be the decedent’s surviving spouse and sought to revoke the administratrix’s letters.

An Heir Lacks Standing to Object to a Will if They Benefit More Under the Will Than Through Intestacy. Matter of Kelman, 2023 NY Slip Op 50914(U) (Sur. Ct. Suffolk County Aug. 3, 2023)

Stephen Bilkis — Sun, 28 Jun 2026 22:27:53 +0000

In New York probate proceedings, not every family member has the right to object to a will. A person must have standing, meaning that the person must show that probate of the will would negatively affect his or her financial interest in the estate. In Matter of Kelman, the Suffolk County Surrogate’s Court considered whether a son of the decedent could object to probate when he would receive more under the will than he would receive if there were no will. The court held that because the objectant was not financially harmed by the will, he lacked standing to object.

Background facts

May Kelman died on January 25, 2018. She was survived by three children, Robert Kelman, Peter Kelman, and Edith Kelman. She was also survived by three grandchildren who were the children of her predeceased son, Michael Kelman.