The testator’s selection of a fiduciary is given great deference by the Surrogate’s Court. Indeed, such respect is accorded to a testator’s, or, in the case of a trustee, a grantor’s selection, that removal will only be granted upon a showing that an estate and its administration would otherwise be jeopardized. Recent opinions addressed to the issues surrounding the appointment and removal of a fiduciary are examined in this month’s column.

Executor Removed for Want of Understanding

In In re Sullivan, N.Y.L.J., Dec. 26, 2019, at 26 (Sur. Ct., Kings County), the Surrogate’s Court was confronted with a petition by the co-executor of the estate, to remove his co-executor/sibling on the grounds that she (1) had moved out of state without timely notifying the court of her change of address, (2) had interfered with his efforts to administer the estate, (3) had failed to fulfill her fiduciary duties to the beneficiaries of the estate, and (4) was no longer mentally and physically capable of serving as fiduciary. The decedent’s will was admitted to probate on June 25, 2015, and his siblings, the petitioner and respondent, who were the principal beneficiaries of his estate, were appointed co-executors on that date.

This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.

To view this content, please continue to their sites.

Not a Lexis Advance® Subscriber?
Subscribe Now

Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now

Why am I seeing this?

LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.

For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]