Opinion
April 4, 1994
Appeal from the Surrogate's Court, Kings County (Bloom, S.).
Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs payable by the appellants personally.
The appellants consented to the settlement of the administratrix's account in 1989 after they had learned, in 1988, that the decedent had established certain Totten Trust accounts which were not listed in the account as estate assets. They have produced no evidence that these accounts were created while the decedent was either mentally incapacitated or under undue influence. They have produced no evidence that any accounts were improperly designated as constituting Totten Trusts. The papers submitted in support of their application consisted of nothing more than speculation. The Surrogate committed no error in denying this application, given the absence of any demonstration that the appellants would be able to successfully challenge the administratrix's account (see, Matter of Frutiger, 29 N.Y.2d 143, 150; Matter of Westberg, 254 App. Div. 320). Mangano, P.J., Miller, Hart and Florio, JJ., concur.