In this proceeding by the nominated executor, the decedent’s daughter, to probate an instrument dated June 3, 2011, a son of the decedent, who is proceeding pro se, filed a document purporting to be objections. Previously, this court determined that because the purported objections did not relate to the validity of the propounded instrument, a decree could be settled admitting the propounded instrument to probate, but letters testamentary would not issue prior to a hearing on the allegations of the son concerning the eligibility of the nominated executor (see Matter of Slotnick, NYLJ, Nov. 11, 2011, at 19, col 4). The daughter then noticed for settlement an order granting her preliminary letters testamentary. In response the same son, again proceeding pro se, filed a document entitled "Objection to the issuance of preliminary letters testamentary and admission of the will to probate” and subsequently filed a reply, both of which reiterate his complaints about the nominated executor, his position as to how estate assets should be handled, but neither of which contest the validity of the instrument.
In his latest objections the son concedes that, presently, he resides at real property located in Suffolk County which, along with Bronx realty, constitute the principal assets of the estate. Although, to date, no fiduciary has been appointed the pro se objections seek, inter alia, a list of assets and an accounting, the turnover of an antique watch specifically bequeathed to him and a share of assets pursuant to the propounded instrument, and an order allowing him to continue residing at the Suffolk County realty until it is sold. In further support of the order for preliminary letters testamentary and in reply the daughter asserts, inter alia, that: (1) due to the prior document styled as objections, there will be a delay in the appointment of an executor; (2) the objectant took up residency at the Suffolk County realty through forcible entry and has refused to pay for his occupancy, despite request; (3) the objectant commenced a separate action in the Supreme Court, Suffolk County against the daughter’s attorney and law firm seeking essentially the same relief sought in the instant objections and other relief; (4) she is the nominated executor and the wishes of the testator should be honored absent bona fide allegations of serious misconduct or wrongdoing; and, (5) objections relating to estate administration and distribution of assets are premature as no fiduciary has been appointed.
