Surrogate TitoneESTATE OF ALBERT J. CASTELLUCCIO, Deceased (17/1218/B) — This is an application by the limited administratrix of this estate to modify the limitations contained in the Limited Letters of Administration issued by this Court on January 9, 2018, so as to enable her to compromise a wrongful death/conscious pain and suffering cause of action on behalf of the decedent.Waivers and consents from all the interested parties, including the New York State Department of Taxation and Finance, have been filed.Upon review of all the papers submitted, the application to modify the limitations and to settle the wrongful death/conscious pain and suffering cause of action in the amount of $105,778.10 is approved. The allocation of the net proceeds shall be 60 percent to the cause of action for conscious pain and suffering and 40 percent to the cause of action for wrongful death.Pursuant to EPTL 5-4.6, attorney fees, inclusive of disbursements, were fixed and allowed in the total amount of $36,572.50 to Weitz and Luxenberg, P.C.The net balance in the amount of $69,572.50 shall be paid as follows: $20,871.75 to Audrey Castelluccio, surviving spouse; $10,435.88 to Anthony Castelluccio; and $10,435.87 to Albert R. Castelluccio for the portion of the settlement allocated to conscious pain and suffering; $27,829.00 to Audrey Castelluccio, surviving spouse for the portion of the settlement allocated to wrongful death.The limitations within the Limited Letters of Administration shall remain in effect, as against any other parties, and any and all other civil actions, until further Order of the Court.Incidental relief prayed for is granted.Decree signed.Dated: February 13, 2019
ESTATE OF MARY CUGINI a/k/a MARY E. CUGINI, Deceased (08/983/E) — Objectant Donna Cugini has moved to compel the Executor Christy Cugini to comply with outstanding discovery demands relative to the Accounting filed in this matter on April 12, 2018. Executor has opposed such motion.In her motion, Objectant seeks responses to her discovery demands dated December 13, 2018, which requests “copies of all loans taken on the subject properties,” “all outstanding notes relative to the subject properties,” “all outstanding property tax and water bills for the subject properties,” and “any expenses that are currently outstanding for the subject properties.”Executor opposes the requested relief on that basis that the discovery is neither material or necessary under CPLR 3101, and that the demands are overly broad and burdensome. Further, the information requested by Objectant would have been referenced in the Accounting Schedules C, C-1, and D, which do not list or reference any such liabilities. Therefore, Executor argues there is no relevant basis for the demand.Under CPLR 3101, “there shall be full disclosure of all matter material and necessary in the prosecution or defense of an action.” This Court agrees that the items requested by Objectant would be listed on the Accounting if they are still outstanding, and further, the requested relief would be also be available in the Real Property Records available in the Richmond County Clerk’s office. See Benson v. Murr, 23 AD2d 756 (2nd Dept 1965) (holding that where a public record is available, it is not necessary that a copy be supplied in discovery proceedings).Objectant has not otherwise shown a relevant basis for the requested discovery.As such, it is herebyORDERED, that the motion of the Objectant is denied.Dated: April 23, 2019
