Matter of Boyer
Annotate this CaseDecided on June 7, 2013
Sur Ct, Dutchess County
In the Matter of Trust under Article Second of the Will of Katharine J. Boyer, Deceased.
2009-97672/J
ALLAN B. RAPPLEYEA, ESQ.
CORBALLY, GARTLAND & RAPPLEYEA, LLP
Attorneys for Petitioners
PETER H. BOYER, MARION BOYER, GEORGES C. BOYER, DIANE BOYER
35 Market Street
Poughkeepsie, New York 12601
RICHARD R. DuVALL, ESQ.
McCABE & MACK, LLP
Attorneys for BARBARA STRICKLAND
63 Washington Street
P.O. Box 509
Poughkeepsie, New York 12602-0509
HYDE PARK JUSTICE COURT
One Cardinal Road
Hyde Park, New York 12538
James D. Pagones, J.
This petition by the trustees under the testamentary trust created in Article SECOND of the decedent's last will for a final judgment awarding possession of 98-106 Walnut Lane, Staatsburg, New York to them; that this Court issue a warrant of eviction to remove Barbara Strickland, the respondent, from possession of the cited property; and, that petitioners recover their costs and expenses associated with this proceeding from the respondent, is granted as follows.
The court has taken judicial notice of undisputed court records and files. (Kingsbrook Jewish Medical Center v. Allstate Insurance Company, 61 AD3d 13, 20 [2d Dept. 2009]; Khatibi v. Weill, 8 AD3d 485 [2d Dept. 2004].)
The record indicates that petitioners commenced a summary proceeding against the respondent to obtain possession of the controverted property on or about November 15, 2012 in the Town [*2]of Hyde Park Justice Court. The respondent has vigorously defended this proceeding.
In response to an application filed by the petitioners asking for a decree determining the property rights, if any, of the respondent in the controverted property, this Court issued a decision, dated April 25, 2013. The Court determined that the property, also known as Hidden Lake Farm, belonged to the trust. The Court determined further that:
"The Will confers no proprietary interest in the Farm to Ms. Strickland nor has Ms. Strickland otherwise demonstrated or even raised a factual question regarding a proprietary interest or claim. Rather, the record as a whole supports the inexorable conclusion that Ms. Strickland was a tenant at will and is now a trust beneficiary. The mere fact that Ms. Strickland has been allowed to live on the Farm after Ms. Boyer's death does not, based on this record, give her any right or claim to the trust property...The second article of the Will gives the Farm solely to the Trustees and confers no property interest whatsoever to Ms. Strickland. She is...a trust beneficiary with no ownership rights."
Petitioners represent that there is a buyer who is interested in purchasing the trust property.
An eviction hearing was scheduled to occur in the Town of Hyde Park Justice Court on May 16, 2013. The day before the hearing, counsel advised the Justice Court and counsel for the petitioners that the property is located in the Town of Clinton. Under Uniform Justice Court Act §204, the Town of Hyde Park Justice Court lacks subject matter jurisdiction. The application now under consideration followed.
It is settled that the Surrogate's Court has jurisdiction over a summary proceeding to evict tenants from estate property, since this is clearly a matter relating to the administration of a decedent's estate. (Matter of Piccione, 57 NY2d 278, 290 [1982], rearg den'd 58 NY2d 824 [1983]; 1 Warren's Heaton on Surrogate's Court Practice, 7th ed., §1.02.) The same authority applies here equally to testamentary trustees. Petitioners have made a prima facie showing that the issues involved with this summary proceeding are intertwined with significant issues relating to the administration of the testamentary trust and resolving them in this Court will facilitate rather than delay administration. (Matter of Delgado, 151 Misc 2d 316, 317 [Sur Ct. Bronx Co. 1991].)
The respondent has failed to submit competent evidence to raise a factual issue necessitating a plenary hearing.
The proposed judgment in favor of petitioners is signed contemporaneously with this decision. The proposed warrant of eviction is also signed, with a stay of execution until July 10, 2013. [*3]
Petitioners may recover their costs and expenses related to this proceeding, including reasonable attorney fees, by the submission of an affirmation of services on notice no later than ten (10) days from the date of this decision.
On this application, this Court considered the verified petition supported by nine (9) exhibits, affirmation in opposition, affidavit in response and reply.
The foregoing constitutes the decision of this Court.
Dated:Poughkeepsie, New York
June 7, 2013
ENTER
HON. JAMES D. PAGONES, S.C.J.
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
