From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Rosenman Colin v. Winston

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Jun 28, 1994
205 A.D.2d 451 (N.Y. App. Div. 1994)

Summary

charging lien permitted against an interest in a trust

Summary of this case from Piccarreto v. Mura

Opinion

June 28, 1994

Appeal from the Supreme Court, New York County (Carol Arber, J.).


The IAS Court properly concluded that the Surrogate's Court has jurisdiction over this action to recover legal fees and is better suited to resolve it. Under SCPA 2110 (2), the Surrogate would be empowered to award legal fees to plaintiff from the estate if it is shown that plaintiff rendered services that increased the value of the estate (see, Matter of Bellinger, 55 A.D.2d 448, 451). Moreover, under N.Y. Constitution, article VI, § 12(d), the Surrogate's Court "shall have jurisdiction over all actions and proceedings relating to the affairs of decedents, probate of wills, administration of estates and actions and proceedings arising thereunder or pertaining thereto" and under CPLR 325 (e), a matter over which the Surrogate's Court has jurisdiction should be transferred to that court if the interests of judicial economy would be served (Birnbaum v. Central Trust Co., 156 A.D.2d 309). Here, the Surrogate's Court is in a unique position to determine the amount of fees owed to plaintiff in light of the extensive litigation that has taken place in that court. Moreover, as the Surrogate's Court noted in its decision consenting to a transfer of this matter, since plaintiff has a statutory charging lien on defendant's interest in the trust and since a proceeding is pending to compel a substantial distribution of assets to pay legal fees, "the settlement of that proceeding and for that matter the final resolution of all litigation in this estate is affected by the charging lien [and] will * * * require a determination of [plaintiff's] fees".

Concur — Ellerin, J.P., Kupferman, Rubin and Nardelli, JJ.


Summaries of

Rosenman Colin v. Winston

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Jun 28, 1994
205 A.D.2d 451 (N.Y. App. Div. 1994)

charging lien permitted against an interest in a trust

Summary of this case from Piccarreto v. Mura

In Rosenman Colin v. Winston (205 A.D.2d 451), the Appellate Division found that the action was properly transferred to the Surrogate's Court because the Surrogate was in a "unique position" to determine the extent of the legal fees owed in light of the extensive litigation which had taken place in that court as well as the fact that plaintiff had a charging lien on defendant's interest in the trust which was a part of the estate.

Summary of this case from Berger v. Ickovicz
Case details for

Rosenman Colin v. Winston

Case Details

Full title:ROSENMAN COLIN, Appellant, v. BRUCE WINSTON, Respondent

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

Date published: Jun 28, 1994

Citations

205 A.D.2d 451 (N.Y. App. Div. 1994)
613 N.Y.S.2d 893

Citing Cases

Lawrence v. Miller

Moreover, there was already pending in Surrogate's Court the special proceeding brought by defendants against…

MGI Repetti LLP v. Estate of Millstein

Removal is proper when Surrogate's Court had extensive litigation history with the case and therefore is in a…