Opinion
06-14-2024
In the MATTER OF SRC FAMILY TRUST ESTABLISHED UNDER the VALHALLA TRUST DATED APRIL 1, 1978, AS AMENDED BY COURT DECREE ISSUED MAY 1, 2006. (Proceeding No. 1.) In the Matter of MJC Family Trust Established Under the Valhalla Trust Dated April 1, 1978, as Amended by Court Decree Issued May 1, 2006. (Proceeding No. 2.) Michael A. Mammolito and Timothy Ahern, Trustees of the SRC Family Trust and the MJC Family Trust, Petitioners-Respondents; v. Mark Congel, Rebecca Congel, Sabrina Congel, Robert Congel, Jack Congel, Ryan Congel, Sydney Congel, Logan Congel and Jaedyn Congel, Objectants-Appellants.
Appeals from an order of the Surrogate’s Court, Onondaga County (Mary Keib Smith, S.), entered October 19, 2022. The order, inter alia, granted in part the motions of petitioners for summary judgment.
BARCLAY DAMON LLP, BUFFALO (JENNIFER G. FLANNERY OF COUNSEL), FOR OBJECTANTS-APPELLANTS REBECCA CONGEL, SABRINA CONGEL, ROBERT CONGEL, JACK CONGEL, RYAN CONGEL, SYDNEY CONGEL, LOGAN CONGEL AND JAEDYN CONGEL.
HANCOCK ESTABROOK, LLP, SYRACUSE (JANET D. CALLAHAN OF COUNSEL), FOR OBJECTANT-APPELLANT MARK CONGEL.
COSTELLO, COONEY & FEARON, PLLC, SYRACUSE (ROBERT J. SMITH OF COUNSEL), AND MORRISON & FOERSTER LLP, BOSTON, MASSACHUSETTS, FOR PETITIONERS-RESPONDENTS.
PRESENT: SMITH, J.P., CURRAN, BANNISTER, AND KEANE, JJ.
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
It is hereby ORDERED that said appeals are unanimously dismissed without costs.
Memorandum: In this dispute over family trusts, objectants appeal from an order that, inter alia, granted in part petitioners’ motions for summary judgment dismissing particular objections to certain settlements of accounting filed by petitioners. Following a subsequent trial, Surrogate’s Court entered a final decree (denominated order) dated December 13, 2023 denying the remaining objections after finding them without merit and judicially settling the accounts. Inasmuch as "[t]he right to appeal from an intermediate order terminates with the entry of a final judgment" (Matter of Scott v. Manilla, 203 A.D.2d 972, 973, 614 N.Y.S.2d 342 [4th Dept. 1994]; see generally CPLR 5501 [a] [1]; Matter of Aho, 39 N.Y.2d 241, 248, 383 N.Y.S.2d 285, 347 N.E.2d 647 [1976]), this appeal from the intermediate order must be dismissed (see McCann v. Gordon, 204 A.D.3d 1449, 1449, 165 N.Y.S.3d 414 [4th Dept. 2022], appeal dismissed 38 N.Y.3d 1158, 174 N.Y.S.3d 348, 195 N.E.3d 55 [2022]; see also Matter of Frank A. Clemente Two-Year Grantor Retained Annuity Trust, 224 A.D.3d 945, 945-946, 205 N.Y.S.3d 227 [3d Dept. 2024]; Matter of Panella [Appeal No. 2], 218 A.D.3d 1198, 1199, 194 N.Y.S.3d 626 [4th Dept. 2023]). Objectants may raise their contentions in an appeal from the final decree (see generally Chase Manhattan Bank, N.A. v. Roberts & Roberts, 63 A.D.2d 566, 567, 404 N.Y.S.2d 608 [1st Dept. 1978]).