Surrogate MellaESTATE OF MICHELE FISCHER O’DONNELL, Deceased (17-2428) — At the call of the calendar on July 11, 2018, the court resolved as follows a motion by the proponent of an instrument dated May 7, 2017, as the will of decedent Michele O’Donnell.That portion of the motion seeking to disqualify the attorney representing a legatee under a prior will and persons stated to be decedent’s distributees, who have sought discovery under SCPA 1404, was denied. Proponent failed to meet his burden of demonstrating a present, actual conflict of interest in the attorney’s representation of these clients (see Matter of Peters, 124 AD3d 1266 [4th Dept 2015]), nor did proponent demonstrate his standing to seek this relief (see A.F.C. Enterprises, Inc. v. N.Y. City Sch. Const. Auth., 33 AD3d 736 [2d Dept 2006]).Proponent also sought confirmation that original wills of the decedent executed prior to 2008 need not be filed with the court. This court had previously directed that original wills from 2008 to the date of decedent’s death be filed, and eight such wills have been filed. In light of the multiplicity of such filings, the court, in the exercise of discretion, confirmed that it was not directing that original wills executed prior to 2008 be filed with the court.Finally, proponent sought an accommodation regarding the location of the examination of the attorney-drafter of the May 7, 2015 instrument, based on his ill health and inability to travel. In light of the proponent’s agreement to pay reasonable travel costs from the estate and to not hold the examination in the attorney-drafter’s home, as well as that attorney’s agreement to appear voluntarily for a deposition in his home state of Pennsylvania, the court directed that his examination take place at a suitable location in or around the city of his residence.This decision, together with the transcript of the July 11, 2018 proceedings, constitutes the order of the court. Dated: August 1, 2018