In re the Estate of Hennel
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
1Dissent
Garry, J.R
(dissenting). We respectfully dissent. Although we agree with the majority in large part, we disagree with the final and critical step in the analysis. We agree that the 2006 transaction in which Edmund Felix Hennel (hereinafter decedent) signed the deed and executed the will constituted his acknowledgment of an agreement that the mortgage would be satisfied from estate assets in exchange for petitioners’ services in managing the property during his lifetime. We further agree that the statute of frauds applies here, as there was no written promise that decedent would not revoke the…
Also in this document: Concurrence.
2Cases cited12 opinions
- American Bartenders School, Inc. v. 105 Madison Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1983
- Swerdloff v. Mobil Oil Corp.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1980
- Fleet Bank v. Pine Knoll Corp.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2002
- Ginsberg v. Fairfield-Noble Corp.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1981
- Lounsbury v. LounsburyAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2002
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.