IN THE MATTER OF THE ESTATE OF NANCY L. HERMANCE

NOT FOR PUBLICATION WITHOUT THE

APPROVAL OF THE APPELLATE DIVISION

SUPERIOR COURT OF NEW JERSEY

APPELLATE DIVISION

DOCKET NO. A-0907-10T4

IN THE MATTER OF THE ESTATE OF

NANCY L. HERMANCE, Deceased.

WENDY HERMANCE,

Plaintiff-Respondent,

vs.

BRETT HERMANCE,

Defendant-Appellant.

__________________________________

May 25, 2011

Submitted: May 18, 2011 - Decided:

Before Judges Cuff and Simonelli.

On appeal from the Superior Court of New Jersey, Chancery Division-Probate Part, Morris County, Docket No. P-0358-2006.

Broderick, Newmark & Grather, attorneys for appellant (Martin Newmark, on the brief).

O'Malley, Surman & Michelini, attorneys for respondent (Susan E. DiMaria, on the brief).

PER CURIAM

In this probate action, the daughter of decedent Nancy L. Hermance, Wendy Hermance, filed a verified complaint in which she alleged that the will and codicil executed by decedent was the product of undue influence by her brother, Brett Hermance. Following a four-day trial, Judge Bozonelis found that the will and codicil were not the product of undue influence. He entered judgment dismissing the complaint and subsequently awarded attorneys' fees to the daughter. The award of attorneys' fees is the sole issue before this court.

Appellant Brett Hermance does not contend that an award of fees was not permissible. He contends that the application for fees must be filed no more than twenty days from the entry of the July 1, 2010 judgment and the August 30, 2010 motion for attorneys' fees filed by respondent Wendy Hermance was filed too late. Judge Bozonelis held that an application for fees may be filed within a reasonable time following entry of the judgment and the motion filed by Wendy Hermance was filed in a reasonable amount of time following entry of judgment.1

We agree and affirm the September 16, 2010 order for payment of fees to respondent.

Affirmed.

1 Respondent's contention that appellant consented to the award of fees is without merit. The record reflects that the parties conferred and agreed to an amount only after the judge ruled that the application was timely and he intended to award fees.