Power Play: Legal Dispute Concerning “Mr. Ranger’s” Will
It is not uncommon for children from a prior marriage to have a legal dispute with a surviving spouse concerning a Will. The New York Post recently reported that the children of deceased hockey legend Rod Gilbert have sued his surviving widow concerning the disposition of his estate. Hockey Hall of Famer Gilbert was a beloved Rangers player, known as “Mr. Ranger,” and was the all-time leader in goals and points for the blue shirts. He accumulated a significant collection of memorabilia and enjoyed material wealth. He married his second wife thirty years before his death.
The children from his first marriage have alleged that the stepmother pressured Gilbert to change his Will on his deathbed to eliminate them from receiving the collectibles and substantial cash. There has been a claim that, during his lifetime, Gilbert promised to leave his children particular assets and that the documents prepared in his final days did not reflect promises made. Suspiciously, the Gilbert home was sold less than two weeks before his death and the proceeds were then “not available” to pay monetary bequests to the children.
The stepmother in this case presented a letter allegedly signed by Gilbert that reversed the prior bequests of memorabilia to the children and instead gave them to his wife. It should be noted that a letter is usually not valid to change the terms of a properly executed Will. In order for a Will to be legally valid in New York State, it needs to comply with the Statute of Wills. In addition, any amendment or revision to a Will needs to be accomplished by a Codicil that also needs to comply with the Statute of Wills in order to be legally valid. A less formal “letter” is highly unlikely to comply with the requirements of a Codicil in order to amend the Will terms.
Crash
News outlets have reported on the untimely death of actress Anne Heche. The late actress was allegedly driving under the influence of alcohol and illegal drugs when she crashed into a Los Angeles area home. She died shortly thereafter from injuries suffered in the crash. As to the unlucky homeowner, the crash caused a fire that destroyed the house and all of the possessions inside. The homeowner has sued the Heche Estate for damages suffered in the crash. This post will address how an Estate is to properly handle legal claims.
This author is not privy to details as to whether Ms. Heche had a Will. If she had died in New York, her estate would be managed differently depending upon whether she had a Will. A person can engage the services of an experienced attorney to prepare a Will and other estate documents that memorializes one’s wishes for the distribution of assets upon death, names those persons to serve as Executor, names guardians for minor children and other details. When there is a Will in New York, one’s estate will be handled through a probate proceeding in Surrogate’s Court. Should a person not have a Will, the estate will be distributed according to the law of intestacy. In the case of intestacy, the surviving relative in the closest degree of relationship will serve as the Administrator. Administration proceedings are also brought in Surrogate’s Court.
An Executor or Administrator, as the case may be, is a fiduciary and is obligated to address claims made against the Estate and pay liabilities before making distributions of assets as directed in the Will or in accordance with the intestacy statute. The homeowner who has sued will have her claim addressed by the fiduciary appointed in the Heche Estate, who will most likely seek legal advice and respond to the Complaint. The fiduciary’s role is to responsibly address claims, evaluate if they are legitimate and attempt to have them reduced before paying such claims with estate assets. That way, the fiduciary is also preserving estate assets, which is another legal obligation of a fiduciary.
The Return of New York Foreclosure Cases
As the COVID-19 pandemic continues to fade, many legal cases that were temporarily postponed by the Courts, such as foreclosures, are resuming and going forward in litigation. During the COVID-19 era, foreclosure cases, along with evictions, were stayed by executive order. That meant that if a lawsuit had been filed to foreclose a property, the Courts did not move the case forward, and simply “froze” the case, pending the end of the pandemic.
Recently, with the waning of COVID-19 and the realization that we will never be completely free of the virus, the Courts in New York have lifted the stay on foreclosure matters. This means both that new foreclosure cases may be filed, and also that existing cases may continue moving through the Courts.
With the economy in recession, and home interest rates rising due to efforts to forestall inflation, many borrowers may now find themselves at risk of foreclosure. This post will discuss what to expect in a foreclosure case now that the Courts are “back to normal.” This review will assume that the property in question is residential, and is the primary residence of the homeowner. For primary residences, there are laws in place to assist homeowners, which do not necessarily apply to cases involving commercial properties or “second homes.”
Commercial Leases and the Pandemic – Who Pays?
As the COVID-19 pandemic fades, some legal cases that were temporarily postponed by the Courts, such as commercial evictions , are resuming and going forward in litigation. A recent case in the news involved the popular family restaurant Applebee’s, and its location in the heart of New York City, in Times Square.
The case involved the non-payment of rent totaling over seven million dollars by Applebee’s during the pandemic. The company argued that it had cash flow problems worsened by the pandemic, had to completely close its Times Square location in March, 2020, and could not reopen until June, 2021.
The attorneys for the landlord argued that there were no clauses in the commercial lease allowing Applebee’s to avoid making payments owed during the pandemic. The Court ruled that Applebee’s had to pay the full amount of the back rent, and also ordered that it be evicted from the Times Square location.
Couple or Throuple? Succession Rights in New York Rental Units
Our firm often fields inquiries from clients regarding successor rights in New York residential rental apartments. First, experienced counsel should determine whether the premises are subject to rent regulation. Rent regulation in New York State applies to many, but not all, residential units. It is more prevalent in New York City than in its surrounding suburbs. However, it does also cover some rental units in Westchester and Nassau Counties.
Assuming that rent regulation does apply to the premises, then the current occupants may be allowed successor rights once the original party on the lease either passes away or vacates the premises. For example, let’s assume Grandma rents an apartment subject to rent regulation, and only her name is on the original lease. As Grandma ages, some of her grandchildren move in to take care of her, and eventually become permanent occupants of the premises. Even though they are not listed as tenants on the original lease, these individuals, as family members occupying the premises, may be entitled to a successor lease once Grandma passes away or moves out of state.
A recent New York City Court case raises new possibilities regarding the legal definition of “family members” as they apply to more modern, non-traditional relationships. The case of West 49th Street, LLC v. O’Neill involved a New York City apartment which was occupied by three unmarried individuals, only one of whom was on the rent-stabilized lease. After the death of the named tenant, one of the other individuals claimed that he was a non-traditional family member, despite the fact that the third individual, and not him, was the “life partner” of the deceased for over twenty-five years.