A New York appeals court holds that the surrogate's (probate) court has jurisdiction to fix and determine the fees of an out-of-state law firm that represented the executor in the administration of an estate. In the Matter of Askin (N.Y. Sup. Ct., App. Div., 2nd Dept., No. 2011-07523, Nov. 27, 2013.
Glenn Askin's mother died in New York State, and Ms. Askin was named executor of the estate. Although the will was admitted to probate in New York, Ms. Askin was a Massachusetts resident, so she hired a Massachusetts law firm to represent her as executor. When the final account was filed, several beneficiaries filed a complaint about fees paid to the law firm.
Ms. Askin requested that the surrogate's court fix and determine the fees to be paid to the law firm. The law firm argued that it was a Massachusetts firm, so the court did not have jurisdiction to the review the fees it charged. The surrogate's court determined it did not have jurisdiction to fix the fee, but it did have authority to order the return of fees paid to an out-of-state attorney. It required that the law firm refund the $133,079.54 in fees it had already received. The law firm appealed.
The New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division, reverses, holding that the surrogate's court does have jurisdiction to fix and determine an out-of-state law firm's fees because the services provided by the law firm were for the benefit of the estate. The court also rules that the surrogate's court should not have directed that the law firm return the fees already paid without determining whether the amount paid to the law firm was excessive.
For the full text of this decision, go to: https://www.courts.state.ny.us/courts/ad2/calendar/webcal/decisions/2013/D37898.pdf
Did you know that the ElderLawAnswers database now contains summaries of more than 2,000 fully searchable elder law decisions dating back to 1993? To search the database, click here.
Subscribe to the Knowledge Bank.
