X

Thank you for sharing!

Your article was successfully shared with the contacts you provided.

The following papers were considered in determining this motion: Papers Numbered Attorney Affirmation in Support of Motion to Change Venue and/or Dismiss the Petition; Affidavit of Abbie Tamber       1, 2 Attorney Affirmation in Opposition to Motion       2 Reply Affirmation 3 DECISION and ORDER In this miscellaneous proceeding, Barbara Notterman (petitioner), a beneficiary of the Morten Rubin Family Trust, filed a petition to compel the trustee Abbie Tamber (trustee) to make a final distribution of the trust principal and income to the petitioner. Pursuant to CPLR 511 and SCPA 207, the trustee moved by order to show cause to change venue, or in the alternative, dismiss the petition. The petitioner opposes the motion. For the following reasons, the motion to change venue is granted solely to the extent of changing venue of this proceeding from Kings County to Chenango County where venue properly lies. Background The petitioner is a beneficiary of the Morten Rubin Family Trust (trust), created by a trust agreement signed on May 19, 2004. Morten Rubin (grantor) died on May 22, 2007. Pursuant to the trust agreement and several amendments that followed, upon the grantor’s death, the trustee was to distribute 65 percent of the principal and income to the petitioner’s sister Laura Zellman, and 35 percent of the principal was to be held in the trust and the income to be distributed to the petitioner. The trustee was also granted absolute discretion to distribute any amount of the principal necessary for the petitioner’s care, support and maintenance. Upon the petitioner’s death, the remaining principal and income were to be distributed to the petitioner’s issue. In July 2018, the petitioner and her sister signed agreements that provided that the grantor’s outstanding tax debts were to be paid out of the trust estate. The agreements further stated, “I agree that final distributions to me from the Trust shall be made upon resolution of the tax matters.” The petitioner contends that the trustee is bound by these agreements and that final distribution of 35 percent of the trust estate and income must be made to the petitioner. However, the trustee has refused, contending that she is abiding the grantor’s intent that the trust principal be withheld and that the petitioner receive only the income during her lifetime. Final distribution has been made to the petitioner’s sister of her share. The petitioner further states that she has no issue and will never have issue. Thus, the remaining trust principal, in the amount of approximately $603,000.00, will eventually go to the petitioner’s sister or her sister’s issue. The petitioner further states that she receives $10,261.62 income per year from the trust principal, while the trustee earned in excess of $9,000.00 in commissions and the trustee’s attorney was paid legal fees in excess of $10,000.00. The petitioner asserts that withholding the trust principal, while the trustee and her attorney earn double the income distributed to the petitioner, is wasteful and contrary to the grantor’s intent. Relevant to the issue of venue, the grantor was a resident of Kings County when the trust agreement was signed. The trust assets are held in a Morgan Stanley investment account located in Florida. The trustee resides in Chenango County in upstate New York. Motion to Change Venue As a preliminary matter, a motion to change venue on the ground that venue is improper must be preceded by a written demand, served with the answer or before the answer is served, that the proceeding be tried in the proper county. CPLR 511(B). Thereafter, the demanding party must move to change venue within 15 days after service of the demand, unless the adverse party consents to the change of venue within 5 days of the demand. Id. Here, the trustee served a demand to change venue dated March 15, 2021 prior to the time an answer was due and moved by order to show cause to change venue on May 29, 2021. Aa such, the demand and motion were timely made. The trustee argues that the petition was brought in an improper county, contrary to SCPA 207, which provides that the proper venue for proceedings related to lifetime trusts is the county where “(a) assets of the trust estate are located, or (b) the grantor was domiciled at the time of the commencement of a proceeding concerning the trust, or (c) a trustee then acting resides, or, if other than a natural person, has its principal office.” SCPA 207(1). The petitioner argues that pursuant to CPLR 503(b), however, a trustee is “deemed a resident of the county of [her] appointment as well as the county in which [s]he actually resides.” Petitioner asserts that since the trust agreement and amendments were executed while the grantor was a resident in Kings County, the trustee is deemed a resident of Kings County where she was “appointed.” While there is a dearth of caselaw on this specific point, there is one Appellate Division decision that is decisive and controlling. That decision held that while a trustee appointed by a court is deemed a resident of the county in which the trustee was appointed, a trustee named as one in the trust document itself is not deemed a resident of the county where the trust document was executed. In re Kelly, 17 A.D.3d 791, 792 (3d Dept 2005) (citing CPLR 503(b)). Accordingly, the trustee herein is a resident of Chenango County only for purposes of venue. Further, where a grantor is deceased, his domicile prior to death is of no relevance. Id. Lastly, there is no dispute that no trust assets are located in Kings County. Therefore, proper venue lies in Chenango County where the trustee actually resides. Accordingly, the trustee’s motion to change venue is granted solely to the extent of changing venue and transferring this proceeding to Chenango County Surrogate’s Court. The portion of the motion alternatively seeking dismissal of the petition is denied without prejudice to renew upon transfer to Chenango County; and it is ORDERED, that the Clerk of the Surrogate’s Court, Kings County shall transfer this proceeding to the Surrogate’s Court, Chenango County. Dated: July 29, 2021

 
Reprints & Licensing
Mentioned in a Law.com story?

License our industry-leading legal content to extend your thought leadership and build your brand.

More From ALM

With this subscription you will receive unlimited access to high quality, online, on-demand premium content from well-respected faculty in the legal industry. This is perfect for attorneys licensed in multiple jurisdictions or for attorneys that have fulfilled their CLE requirement but need to access resourceful information for their practice areas.
View Now
Our Team Account subscription service is for legal teams of four or more attorneys. Each attorney is granted unlimited access to high quality, on-demand premium content from well-respected faculty in the legal industry along with administrative access to easily manage CLE for the entire team.
View Now
Gain access to some of the most knowledgeable and experienced attorneys with our 2 bundle options! Our Compliance bundles are curated by CLE Counselors and include current legal topics and challenges within the industry. Our second option allows you to build your bundle and strategically select the content that pertains to your needs. Both options are priced the same.
View Now
September 05, 2024
New York, NY

The New York Law Journal honors attorneys and judges who have made a remarkable difference in the legal profession in New York.


Learn More
May 15, 2024
Philadelphia, PA

The Legal Intelligencer honors lawyers leaving a mark on the legal community in Pennsylvania and Delaware.


Learn More
May 16, 2024
Dallas, TX

Consulting Magazine recognizes leaders in technology across three categories Leadership, Client Service and Innovation.


Learn More

Health Law Associate CT Shipman is seeking an associate to join our national longstanding health law practice. Candidates must have t...


Apply Now ›

Shipman & Goodwin LLP is seeking two associates to expand our national commercial real estate lending practice. Candidates should have ...


Apply Now ›

Epstein Becker & Green is seeking an associate to joins its Commercial Litigation practice in our Columbus or Cincinnati offices. Ca...


Apply Now ›
04/29/2024
The National Law Journal

Professional Announcement


View Announcement ›
04/15/2024
Connecticut Law Tribune

MELICK & PORTER, LLP PROMOTES CONNECTICUT PARTNERS HOLLY ROGERS, STEVEN BANKS, and ALEXANDER AHRENS


View Announcement ›
04/11/2024
New Jersey Law Journal

Professional Announcement


View Announcement ›