Legal Opinion

In re the Estate of Cox

New York Surrogate's Court

Decided March 19, 1999PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION OF THE COURT

Larry M. Himelein, J.

The question posed by this case is whether the sole asset of the estate — $30,000 plus accrued interest — is subject to recovery by the Social Services Department pursuant to Social Services Law § 369.

Decedent Hazel Farrington Cox was admitted to the Cattaraugus County Nursing Home in Machias on or about September 26, 1994, and thereafter applied for medical assistance (MA) from the Cattaraugus County Department of Social Services (DSS). A MA case was opened for Ms. Cox on November 1, 1994. On December 19, 1995, decedent’s residence was sold and…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Society of Plastics Industry, Inc. v. County of SuffolkNew York Court of Appeals · 1991
  2. Dairylea Cooperative, Inc. v. WalkleyNew York Court of Appeals · 1975
  3. Mobil Oil Corp. v. Syracuse Industrial Development AgencyNew York Court of Appeals · 1990

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Clement v. MontwillNew York Supreme Court · 2006

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API