Surrogate Vincent Versaci
Decedent's two grandchildren commenced this action to determine the validity of their claim against the estate for satisfaction of an outstanding mortgage encumbering real property decedent conveyed to them four years before his death. They asserted four claims, including promissory estoppel. Executrix filed objections to the petition, denying that petitioners had a valid claim against the estate. Petitioners agreed to take over the daily management and ownership of a rental property for decedent in exchange for his promise to pay off the existing mortgage at the time of his death from estate assets. A deed and will were executed simultaneously, neither claiming that petitioners assumed the mortgage. Decedent executed a subsequent will without the language relating to the mortgage. The court found respondent's argument that there was no valid agreement by the parties' belied by the testimony of the attorney who drafted the first will. It found petitioners' consideration for decedent's promise to pay the mortgage was the assumption of all property management responsibilities. The court ruled it should invoke the equitable doctrine of promissory estoppel and sustain petitioners' claim as it found a valid and binding agreement despite an absence of a written contract.
