Surrogate Mella
ESTATE OF RUTH HARTMAN, A/K/A RUTH JEANETTE HARTMAN, A/K/A RUTH J. HARTMAN-ZUVICICH, Deceased (21-1168/A) — By decision and order of this court dated August 5, 2021, the instant administration proceeding commenced by decedent Ruth Hartman’s niece, Joan Rubin, was held in abeyance pending determination of a petition to probate testamentary instruments dated May 19, 2015 and June 8, 2015, filed by decedent’s niece, Dorothy Wells. That same decision and order, however, noted Ms. Rubin’s request for Letters of Temporary Administration, and provided her with an opportunity to explain why the appointment of a temporary fiduciary is in the best interests of the estate, and further provided a deadline for any response or opposition to such request. Ms. Rubin’s counsel filed an affirmation in support of her request and Ms. Wells’s counsel filed an affirmation in opposition to the issuance of Letters of Temporary Administration to Ms. Rubin.1 A review of these submissions by the court fails to provide a basis for the appointment of a temporary fiduciary at this time (1 Harris NY Estates: Probate Admin & Litigation §11:3 [6th ed] [court should be reluctant to appoint temporary administrator unless there is a case of real necessity]). No evidence of assets or affairs of the decedent that require imminent or urgent marshaling or managing, for example, has been furnished (see Matter of Tiffany, NYLJ, July 20, 2000, at 34, col 4 [Sur Ct, Westchester County] [Surrogates retain power, in equity, to appoint temporary administrators to conserve assets of estate]; see also 2 Warren’s Heaton on Surrogate’s Court Practice §34.01 [2021] [appointment of temporary administrator in discretion of court]). In view of this record, on which it cannot be concluded that there are assets of the estate that would be in jeopardy without the appointment of a temporary administrator, and the likely contested proceedings in this case, the request for the appointment of a Temporary Administrator is denied at this time, without prejudice to a new application upon a showing that there is a need for such appointment. This decision constitutes the order of the court. Dated: September 16, 2021
