ESTATE OF THE GLORIA M. SMITH GRANTOR TEN YEAR RETAINED INCOME TRUST, (13/3264/B) — On April 8, 2015, pursuant to its authority under SCPA 1502(2), this court suspended respondent Dana Smith as trustee of The Gloria M. Smith Grantor Ten Year Retained Income Trust; and appointed petitioners Westey Smith Mandriota, Tracey McCauley and Kimberly Hysni as successor co-trustees of captioned trust, upon due qualification, for the purpose of marketing and selling the trust realty located at 167 East Shore Road in Huntington Bay, New York, so that the trust could be wound up and its assets distributed. Noting that this respondent was precluded on SCPA 707(e) grounds from being appointed fiduciary of the estate of Gloria M. Smith (File #2013-3264/A), the court held that it is authorized to appoint a successor trustee to wind up a terminated trust’s administration or distribution “… when there is no person in office able to execute it” (SCPA 1502 [5]). The court specifically found that “(R) espondent’s apparent failure to fulfill her fiduciary obligations renders her subject to suspension and, ultimately, removal as trustee, and allows for the appointment of a successor or successors to complete captioned trust’s administration” (In the Matter of the Gloria M. Smith Grantor Ten Year Retained Income Trust, Decision April 8, 2015, S. Czygier, File #2013-3264/B). A hearing was then scheduled for respondent’s removal.
After a number of adjournments and bankruptcy filings by respondent in two different jurisdictions, the matter came on to be heard on December 10, 2015 and continued on December 21, 2015. At the duly appointed time for the continuance of the hearing, the court was advised by counsel for respondent that her client would be discharging her and was seeking new counsel. Indeed, counsel applied to the court for leave to withdraw as respondent’s counsel, indicating that there was a breakdown in communication between her and her client. She also sought an order of this court allowing her client access to the trust property so that respondent could obtain the papers she claims to need in order to defend herself against the petitioners’ allegations.
