Wasserstein v. McCarthy

Decision Date07 February 2017
Citation2017 N.Y. Slip Op. 00943,46 N.Y.S.3d 414 (Mem),147 A.D.3d 464
Parties In re PAMELA S. Wasserstein, et al., Petitioners–Respondents, v. Erin McCARTHY, Respondent–Appellant. In re Ellis Jones, Petitioner–Respondent, v. Erin McCarthy, Respondent–Appellant. In re Pamela S. Wasserstein, et al., Petitioners–Respondents, v. Erin McCarthy, Respondent–Appellant.
CourtNew York Supreme Court — Appellate Division

Carroll McNulty & Kull, LLC, New York (Christopher R. Carroll of counsel), for appellant.

Milbank, Tweed, Handley & McCloy LLP, New York (Robert C. Hora of counsel), for Pamela S. Wasserstein, Ben C. Wasserstein and A.D. Scoop Wasserstein, respondents.

Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison LLP, New York (Andrew G. Gordon of counsel), for Anup Bagaria, Ellis B. Jones and George L. Majoros, Jr., respondents.

Solomon Blum Heymann LLP, New York (Charles F. Gibbs of counsel), for Dash P. Wasserstein and Jack D. Wasserstein, respondents.

Farrell Fritz, Uniondale (Eric W. Penzer of counsel), for Sky W.E. Wasserstein, respondent.

Appeals from decrees, Surrogate's Court, New York County (Nora S. Anderson, S.), entered on or about May 22, 2015, which approved petitioner trustees' proposed distributions, unanimously dismissed, without costs, as taken from nonappealable decrees.

Respondent failed to file objections to petitioners' accounts, thereby defaulting in this proceeding (see Matter of E. & H. Goldstein Family Trust, 81 A.D.3d 728, 916 N.Y.S.2d 223 [2d Dept.2011] ). No appeal lies from an order entered upon default (CPLR 5511 ; see e.g. Matter of Dietz, 29 N.Y.2d 915, 328 N.Y.S.2d 864, 279 N.E.2d 607 [1972] ; Goldstein, 81 A.D.3d at 729, 916 N.Y.S.2d 223 ).

FRIEDMAN, J.P., ANDRIAS, MOSKOWITZ, KAPNICK, KAHN, JJ., concur.

To continue reading

Request your trial

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT