Matter of Reitano

Matter of Reitano 2011 NY Slip Op 08206 Decided on November 15, 2011 Appellate Division, First Department Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431. This opinion is uncorrected and subject to revision before publication in the Official Reports.

Decided on November 15, 2011
Mazzarelli, J.P., Catterson, Moskowitz, Renwick, Abdus-Salaam, JJ.
6024 500173/02

[*1]In re Gina Marie Reitano, etc.,

Jennifer Cangro, an Alleged Incapacitated Person, Appellant,

v

Mary . Rosado, Respondent.






Jennifer Cangro, appellant pro se.
R. Brent English, New York, for respondent.

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Lottie Wilkins, J.), entered June 28, 2010, after a hearing, which (1) confirmed the December 22, 2008 report of the Special Referee; (2) approved and judicially settled the amended final accounting of the guardian; (3) compensated nunc pro tunc respondent guardian $3,791.43 in commissions for the years 2003 through 2005; (4) compensated nunc pro tunc the guardian $3,113.50 for extraordinary services; (5) compensated nunc pro tunc the prior guardian ad litem $1,877.43; (6) compensated nunc pro tunc Donald Lefari, Esq., for legal services to the guardian in the amount of $1,200; (7) compensated nunc pro tunc Phyllis Solomon Esq. $1,500 for services rendered to Cangro; (8) ordered Cangro to pay $1,500 to Summerfield M. Baldwin, Esq. for services rendered as guardian ad litem relating to the review of the amended final accounting; (9) ordered Cangro to pay $1,500 to R. Brent English, Esq. as compensation for services rendered as counsel to Rosado in the hearing to review the amended final accounting; and (10) ordered Cangro to pay the sum of $1,200 to Edward Chesnick for his services as special referee to review the amended final accounting, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Supreme Court properly confirmed the Special Referee's report since the Referee's findings were supported by the record and there is no basis on this record to set aside his findings (see Flanagan & Cooke v RC 27th Ave. Realty Corp., 305 AD2d 135 [2003]). Supreme Court also properly awarded respondent Rosado commissions for her work as appellant's guardian, as the record contains no evidence of wrongdoing (see SCPA 2307; Matter of Ellman, 7 AD3d 423 [2004]). The court properly exercised its discretion in awarding a fee to Rosado for extraordinary services in light of the significant time and effort she spent on appellant's behalf (see Matter of Stortecky v Mazzone, 85 NY2d 518 [1995]).

Supreme Court properly awarded the various fees to others involved in the matter. The fees for the guardian ad litem, the special referee, and Rosado's counsel for this final accounting were supported by affidavits or affirmations of services and were reasonable fees for the services provided. Moreover, the sums were appropriately charged to Cangro since her baseless [*2]accusations necessitated this additional proceeding. The approval of the fees previously paid to Solomon, Reitano and Lefari was proper since they had also been supported by affidavits or affirmations of services, were reasonable, and were not objected to by the referee.

We find that appellant was not denied due process under the New York State Constitution. Pursuant to this Court's order (45 AD3d 281 [2007]), and as required by CPLR 1201, a guardian ad litem was properly appointed to represent appellant's interests in this proceeding in which she contested the accounting and fees awarded to Rosado. Appellant was provided ample opportunity to make her arguments regarding the accounting, in writings by her and her guardian ad litem, and she was also permitted to orally argue her position at a hearing. Similarly, the record is devoid
of evidence that could be construed as a denial of appellant's right to equal protection.

THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER
OF THE SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE DIVISION, FIRST DEPARTMENT.

ENTERED: NOVEMBER 15, 2011

CLERK