From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Matter of Gardner

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Sep 17, 1991
176 A.D.2d 142 (N.Y. App. Div. 1991)

Opinion

September 17, 1991

Appeal from the Surrogate's Court, New York County (Renee R. Roth, S.).


Petitioner's right to an accounting is dependent upon recognition of Catherine Gardner as "surviving spouse" of decedent. As it has been undisputed that they were married, the burden was upon respondent to establish a disqualification under the sections relied upon by her, EPTL 5-1.2 (a) (5) and (6) (Matter of Maiden, 284 N.Y. 429; Matter of Riefberg, 58 N.Y.2d 134). While it is clear that Catherine Gardner departed the marital residence at least five years prior to decedent's death, to care for her ill sister in Florida, there was an inadequate showing of the requisite elements that such departure was unjustified and without decedent's consent (supra). Respondent also failed to establish that Catherine Gardner had a duty to support decedent; had the means or ability to do so; and failed or refused to do so.

Concur — Murphy, P.J., Rosenberger, Ellerin, Kassal and Rubin, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Matter of Gardner

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Sep 17, 1991
176 A.D.2d 142 (N.Y. App. Div. 1991)
Case details for

Matter of Gardner

Case Details

Full title:In the Matter of the Estate of WILLIAM D. GARDNER, Deceased. ISABELLE…

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

Date published: Sep 17, 1991

Citations

176 A.D.2d 142 (N.Y. App. Div. 1991)
574 N.Y.S.2d 28

Citing Cases

Sinanaj v. City of N.Y. (In re 91st St. Crane Collapse Litig.)

DeMatteis "also failed to establish that [either Kurtaj or Sinanovic] had a duty to support [the other party]…

Matter of Gardner

Decided November 26, 1991 Appeal from (1st Dept: 176 A.D.2d 142) FINALITY OF JUDGMENTS AND…