ESTATE OF ERIC GARNER, Deceased

ESTATE OF ERIC GARNER, Deceased (14/745/A) — Before the court is a motion and a cross motion with various relief sought. The court appointed guardian ad-litem, (hereinafter referred to as GAL), Lorraine Coyle, has moved to compel the petitioner to disclose relevant documents and records, mainly pertaining to time records kept by the petitioning attorney to justify his legal fee. She further moves to disqualify the law firm of Beldock Levine & Hoffman (hereinafter referred to as 'BLH') stating a non-waivable conflict of interest is present by the representation of both the fiduciary, Gwendlyn Carr and the spouse of the decedent, Esaw Snipes. In response, BLH has moved to remove Lorraine Coyle as guardian ad litem stating that she is wasting resources, is not qualified to serve, and delaying this matter unnecessarily. Papers were submitted and oral argument were heard on all issues.

Thank you for sharing!

Your article was successfully shared with the contacts you provided.

ESTATE OF ERIC GARNER, Deceased (14/745/A) — Before the court is a motion and a cross motion with various relief sought. The court appointed guardian ad-litem, (hereinafter referred to as GAL), Lorraine Coyle, has moved to compel the petitioner to disclose relevant documents and records, mainly pertaining to time records kept by the petitioning attorney to justify his legal fee. She further moves to disqualify the law firm of Beldock Levine & Hoffman (hereinafter referred to as ‘BLH’) stating a non-waivable conflict of interest is present by the representation of both the fiduciary, Gwendlyn Carr and the spouse of the decedent, Esaw Snipes. In response, BLH has moved to remove Lorraine Coyle as guardian ad litem stating that she is wasting resources, is not qualified to serve, and delaying this matter unnecessarily. Papers were submitted and oral argument were heard on all issues.

Clearly, there is acrimony between the GAL and the law firm of BLH. Each side is representing their clients in a most zealous fashion. However, there is nothing to warrant the removal of either side. Ms. Coyle, as GAL, must ensure that her client obtains the largest amount possible from the settlement proceeds and must do so above the objection of BLH. Her role is not to simply agree to whatever petitioner’s compromise papers state without first examining the reasoning behind it. It must further be pointed out to BLH that the GAL does not get compensated for travel time, so it is irrelevant that Ms. Coyle travels in from the Bronx. Therefore, the motion to remove Lorraine Coyle as GAL is denied.

ESTATE OF ERIC GARNER, Deceased

Share with Email

Thank you for sharing!

Trending Stories

More From ALM

Subscribe to New York Law Journal