In re the Estate of Rothko
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
1Dissent
Nunez, J. (dissenting in part).
I part company with my brethren of the majority and Surrogate Midonick only on the issue of damages. The Surrogate correctly found that the executors had the power of sale (EPTL § 11-1.1, subd [b], par [5], cl [B]) and were not required to distribute in kind. The general rule is that executors, absent any authorization or direction in the testator’s will, are duty-bound to wind up the affairs of the estate except for the temporary purpose of converting the assets into money (cf. Willis v Sharp, 113 NY 586, 589; Matter of Begent, 37 AD2d 310, 311). In Matter of…
2Cases cited14 opinions
- Willis v. . SharpNew York Court of Appeals · 1889
- Jones v. . MorganNew York Court of Appeals · 1882
- Menzel v. ListNew York Court of Appeals · 1969
- In re the Estate of RothkoNew York Surrogate's Court · 1975
- Bonham v. Coe, KatzNew York Court of Appeals · 1937
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.