ESTATE OF EUGENIA STANESCU, Deceased

ESTATE OF EUGENIA STANESCU, Deceased (11/2309/B) — In this contested probate proceeding, the objectant John Stanescu, one of the decedent's two sons, moves by order to show cause to disqualify Brosnan & Hegler, LLP (the law firm) from representing the respondent proponent, Catherine Stanescu, the decedent's only daughter who is the nominated executor of an instrument dated June 23, 2011 and the nominated successor trustee of the Eugenia Stanescu 2011 Revocable Trust (the 2011 trust). The motion is opposed by the proponent. The second successor guardian ad litem for the other son under a disability and the guardian ad litem for Catherine's two infant children who, along with the proponent are beneficiaries of the 2011 trust, take no position on the disqualification motion.

Thank you for sharing!

Your article was successfully shared with the contacts you provided.

ESTATE OF EUGENIA STANESCU, Deceased (11/2309/B) — In this contested probate proceeding, the objectant John Stanescu, one of the decedent’s two sons, moves by order to show cause to disqualify Brosnan & Hegler, LLP (the law firm) from representing the respondent proponent, Catherine Stanescu, the decedent’s only daughter who is the nominated executor of an instrument dated June 23, 2011 and the nominated successor trustee of the Eugenia Stanescu 2011 Revocable Trust (the 2011 trust). The motion is opposed by the proponent. The second successor guardian ad litem for the other son under a disability and the guardian ad litem for Catherine’s two infant children who, along with the proponent are beneficiaries of the 2011 trust, take no position on the disqualification motion.

The decedent died on August 26, 2011 survived by the proponent and two sons, her only distributees. The propounded instrument dated June 23, 2011 is a “pour over” will whose sole beneficiary is the 2011 trust, an inter vivos trust executed on the same day as the propounded instrument. Both instruments were attorney drafted and supervised, and were witnessed by two attorneys and a paralegal employed at the drafting attorney’s law firm. The decedent was the original trustee of the 2011 trust. Neither the 2011 trust nor the propounded instrument make any provision for either son. Although the estate assets are relatively modest, the trust assets are considerably larger and include the decedent’s realty. A separate proceeding by the objectant to invalidate the 2011 trust is pending along with this contested probate proceeding.

ESTATE OF EUGENIA STANESCU, Deceased

Share with Email

Thank you for sharing!

Trending Stories

More From ALM

Subscribe to New York Law Journal