From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Matter of Durchin

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Jul 10, 1995
217 A.D.2d 582 (N.Y. App. Div. 1995)

Opinion

July 10, 1995

Appeal from the Surrogate's Court, Kings County (Bloom, S.).


Ordered that the order is affirmed, with one bill of costs payable by the appellant personally.

On September 24, 1990, the appellant signed a waiver of service of citation and consent to probate form which provided that she "do[es] hereby appear in person and waive the issue and service of citation in the above-entitled matter" dealing with the probate of the will of Zev Durchin, deceased. By executing that waiver, she appeared in the proceeding, and was subject to the personal jurisdiction of the court (see, SCPA 401).

Thereafter, the daughter of the decedent filed objections to probate. The appellant acknowledges that, by letter dated October 18, 1993, she received actual notice of those objections, and of the tentative terms of the compromise agreement. Under the terms of SCPA former 1411, still in effect in 1993, she was not entitled to statutory notice of the objections to probate, because she had appeared in the proceeding (see, SCPA 1411 [b] [ii]). Nevertheless, as the Surrogate found, she had both actual and statutory notice, yet took no formal action until after the decree admitting the will to probate, subject to the compromise agreement, was entered. Accordingly, her motion to set aside the decree was properly denied. Sullivan, J.P., O'Brien, Altman and Goldstein, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Matter of Durchin

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Jul 10, 1995
217 A.D.2d 582 (N.Y. App. Div. 1995)
Case details for

Matter of Durchin

Case Details

Full title:In the Matter of ZEV DURCHIN, Deceased. ALIZA WELNER, Appellant; LEIB…

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department

Date published: Jul 10, 1995

Citations

217 A.D.2d 582 (N.Y. App. Div. 1995)
628 N.Y.S.2d 815

Citing Cases

Home Sav. Bank v. Watersedge Estates

The Supreme Court providently exercised its discretion in denying the appellant's motion. The appellant was…