Legal Opinion

In re the Estate of Dorman

New York Surrogate's Court

Decided January 20, 1998Published

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION OF THE COURT

Larry M. Himelein, J.

Respondents, two of decedent’s three children, have filed a *480demand for the examination of the executrix pursuant to SCPA 2211 (2). Respondents have also served a “notice for discovery and production of documents” that requires the executrix to turn over to respondents certain documents prior to the examination. When the executrix refused to comply, respondents brought the instant motion seeking CPLR article 31 discovery prior to the SCPA 2211 examination.

Respondents contend that, because the SCPA does not provide for discovery, the CPLR discovery rules…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. In re the Estate of StanleyNew York Surrogate's Court · 1969
  2. In re the Estate of CoyleNew York Surrogate's Court · 1969
  3. In re the Estate of WelshAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1965
  4. In re HambletonAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1994
  5. In re the Accounting of WalzerAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1959

2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API