Blaine v. Blaine (In re Blaine)

• Decision Date: 20 October 2022
• Docket Number: 533495
• Parties: In the MATTER OF the ESTATE OF June F. BLAINE, Also Known as June F. Jarvis, Deceased. Hope A. Blaine, as Administrator of the Estate of June F. Blaine, Also Known as June F. Jarvis, Deceased, Respondent; v. Michael H. Blaine, Appellant.
• Court: New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division

209 A.D.3d 1124
177 N.Y.S.3d 351

In the MATTER OF the ESTATE OF June F. BLAINE, Also Known as June F. Jarvis, Deceased.

Hope A. Blaine, as Administrator of the Estate of June F. Blaine, Also Known as June F. Jarvis, Deceased, Respondent;
v.
Michael H. Blaine, Appellant.

533495

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Third Department, New York.

Calendar Date: September 8, 2022
Decided and Entered: October 20, 2022

177 N.Y.S.3d 353

Michael H. Blaine, Sun City Center, Florida, appellant pro se.

Hope A. Blaine, Plattsburgh, respondent pro se.

Before: Lynch, J.P., Aarons, Reynolds Fitzgerald, Fisher and McShan, JJ.

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

McShan, J.

209 A.D.3d 1124

Appeal from a decree of the Surrogate's Court of Clinton County (William A. Favreau, S.), entered May 4, 2021, which granted petitioner's application, in a proceeding pursuant to SCPA article 22, for judicial settlement of the accounting of decedent's estate.

June F. Blaine (hereinafter decedent), died testate in February 2018, survived by her eight adult children (hereinafter collectively referred to as the siblings), including petitioner and respondent. Decedent's eldest daughter, Diane Akey, was appointed by Surrogate's Court as the executor pursuant to decedent's will and, in April 2018, Akey sought to admit decedent's will to probate. Pursuant to decedent's will, beyond a specific bequest of certain real property to one of her children, the "remainder of [decedent's] property and estate, both real and personal," was bequeathed to all of the siblings in equal shares, per stirpes. Relevant to this appeal, decedent's property subject to this bequest included a 2004 Ford Taurus (hereinafter the vehicle) and an 8.6–acre vacant lot located on

209 A.D.3d 1125

Lyons Road in the Town of Peru, Clinton County (hereinafter the property).

In September 2018, petitioner requested the issuance of letters of administration c.t.a. after probate (see SCPA 1418 ). Subsequently, in January 2019, Akey sought to resign as the executor, citing the acrimony that had arisen amongst the siblings over the settling of decedent's modest estate. Akey simultaneously petitioned for an intermediate accounting, which, among other things, denoted that the vehicle was being transferred to one of the siblings for an estimated value of $2,000.¹ Respondent opposed Akey's resignation as well as the intermediate accounting, and sought to withdraw his prior consent to petitioner's appointment as administrator. Ultimately, over respondent's objection, Surrogate's Court issued an intermediate decree of judicial settlement and, separately, granted petitioner letters of administration c.t.a.

In July 2020, after listing the property on the Multiple Listing Service, petitioner sold it for $41,500. Accounting for the proceeds from the sale of the estate property, petitioner then commenced this proceeding in September 2020 to judicially settle the account. A one-day virtual hearing was held in January 2021, in which respondent appeared in a self-represented capacity to object to the settlement and examine petitioner (see SCPA 2211[2] ). Respondent primarily contended that his request to subdivide the property at the expense of the estate was not properly considered and that petitioner sold the property for an amount that did not represent its actual value. Respondent also renewed

177 N.Y.S.3d 354

his prior contention that the vehicle was unlawfully transferred to one of the siblings, and that Akey had failed to obtain an accurate valuation of the vehicle prior to the transfer. Surrogate's Court ultimately determined that the actions taken by petitioner were "appropriate and valid in completing the liquidation of the [e]state assets including ... [petitioner's] arm's length sale of the [property]." Specifically, Surrogate's Court determined that subdividing the property into seven parcels would not be feasible given the "unique nature and character of real estate" and that respondent failed to demonstrate that the property was sold for less than fair market value. Accordingly, the court granted the petition to judicially settle the final account and issued a decree to that effect. Respondent appeals, and we affirm.

"Where the beneficiary of an estate has demanded an accounting, the party submitting the account has the burden of

209 A.D.3d 1126

proving that he or she has fully accounted for all the assets of the estate" ( Matter of Carbone, 101 A.D.3d 866, 868, 955 N.Y.S.2d 209 [2d Dept. 2012] [internal quotation marks and citations omitted]; see ...