Surrogate Rita Mella
A petition sought to compel an accounting from executor Rucci, decedent’s daughter, which was granted. A second petition sought to compel Rucci to pay a beneficiary, Dingle, decedent’s other daughter, all her beneficial interest, but was held in abeyance pending Rucci’s accounting. The estate was left to decedent’s five children including Dingle and Rucci, in equal shares. The court noted the usual procedure was to hold relief in abeyance when an accounting was directed to avoid prejudice, unless an adequate reason why payment should be directed immediately was presented. It found no such reason to stray from the general procedure here. The court found Dingle failed to present an adequate reason for directing immediate payment, noting she failed to demonstrate her requested relief would not adversely affect, or potentially prejudice, the rights of others. It noted the largest asset of the estate was shares allocated to an unsold cooperative apartment, thus stating calculating the share Dingle may be entitled to would yield an imperfect result. Accordingly, Dingle’s request to compel Rucci to pay her legacy in full was held in abeyance pending the directed accounting by Rucci.
