In re Blaukopf
| Decision Date | 18 May 2010 |
| Citation | 900 N.Y.S.2d 657,73 A.D.3d 1040 |
| Parties | In the Matter of Adele BLAUKOPF, deceased. Daria Gavat, appellant; Jacqueline Austin (Levine), et al., respondents. |
| Court | New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division |
Seltzer Sussman Habermann & Heitner, LLP, Jericho, N.Y. (Brian R. Heitner of counsel), for appellant.
Edward K. Blodnick & Associates, P.C., Garden City, N.Y. (Thomas R. Fazio of counsel), for respondents.
In a probate proceeding, the petitioner appeals from an order of the Surrogate's Court, Nassau County (Riordan, S.), dated March 31, 2009, which, inter alia, vacated a decree dated October 31, 2008, admitting to probate the decedent's will dated November 8, 2006, and vacated the letters testamentary issued to her.
ORDERED that the order is affirmed, with costs payable by the petitioner personally to the respondents.
A court may exercise its inherent powers to "vacate its own [decree] for sufficient reason and in the interests of substantial justice" ( Woodson v. Mendon Leasing Corp., 100 N.Y.2d 62, 68, 760 N.Y.S.2d 727, 790 N.E.2d 1156; see Ladd v. Stevenson, 112 N.Y. 325, 332, 19 N.E. 842; Matter of Culberson, 11 A.D.3d 859, 861, 784 N.Y.S.2d 167; Goldman v. Cotter, 10 A.D.3d 289, 293, 781 N.Y.S.2d 28). Under the particular facts of this case, including, inter alia, the fact that the petitioner filed a total of three different petitions for probate and letters testamentary wherein she made several conflicting statements, the Surrogate's Court properly vacated thesubject decree and letters testamentary issued to the petitioner.
The parties' remaining contentions either are without merit or need not be reached in light of our determination.
To continue reading
Request your trial
- Billman v. Town of Deerpark
- Burr v. Fellner
-
Boykin v. Pub. Adm'r of Kings Cnty. (In re Phillips)
... ... Mendon Leasing Corp., 100 N.Y.2d 62, 68, 760 N.Y.S.2d 727, 790 N.E.2d 1156 ; see Ladd v. Stevenson, 112 N.Y. 325, 332, 19 N.E. 842 ; Matter of Alayon, 86 A.D.3d 644, 645, 927 N.Y.S.2d 610 ; Matter of Adelson, 84 A.D.3d 952, 953, 921 N.Y.S.2d 884 ; Matter of Blaukopf, 73 A.D.3d 1040, 1041, 900 N.Y.S.2d 657 ; Matter of Culberson, 11 A.D.3d 859, 861, 784 N.Y.S.2d 167 ). This inherent authority "should be resorted to only to relieve a party from judgments taken through [fraud,] mistake, inadvertence, surprise or excusable neglect" ( Matter of McKenna v. County of ... ...
- Fox v. N.Y.C. Dep't of Educ.