Opinion

In re Beiny

  • 129 A.D.2d 126
  • 517 N.Y.S.2d 474
  • 1987 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 43671
Court
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
Filed
Jun 18, 1987
Status
Published
Author
Kupferman
On the bench
Kupferman
Cited by
56 cases
Authority
More cited than 1.7%

“While it is questionable whether even a duly appointed executor would have had the power to waive the decedent's attorney-client privilege ... it is quite certain that one merely named as an executor in an unprobated will would have had no authority whatsoever to do so”

How later courts described this case

  • “While it is questionable whether even a duly appointed executor would have had the power to waive the decedent's attorney-client privilege ... it is quite certain that one merely named as an executor in an unprobated will would have had no authority whatsoever to do so”
  • counsel disqualified because of misuse of discovery proceedings to compromise confidences and secrets of adverse party

Written by the judges who cited it.

Distinguished

  • Distinguished by Roberts v. Corwin, 118 A.D.3d 571 (2014)

    We also reject defendants’ argument, relying on our decision in Matter of Weinberg (132 AD2d 190 [1st Dept 1987], lv dismissed 71 NY2d 994 [1988]; Matter of Beiny [Weinberg], 129 AD2d 126 [1st Dept 1987]), that there are circumstances where a counsel’s conduct is so egregious that a court should impose the most severe sanctions, even in the absence of actual prejudice.
    Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New YorkJun 19, 20142 citing opinionsRead it

The opinion

Kupferman, J. (dissenting in part).

I would affirm for the reasons stated by Surrogate Lambert. (Cf., S & S Hotel Ventures Ltd. Partnership v 777 S. H. Corp., 69 NY2d 437 ; Ceramco, Inc. v Lee Pharms., 510 F2d 268 [2d Cir 1975].)

Murphy, P. J., Mironas, Kassal and Wallach, JJ., concur; Kupferman, J., dissents in part in an opinion.

Order, Surrogate’s Court, New York County, entered July 17, 1986, modified, on the law and the facts, and in the exercise of discretion, to the extent of granting that part of the Trustee’s motion seeking disqualification of petitioner’s counsel, and, except as so modified, said order is affirmed, without costs and without disbursements. Appeal from order of said court entered on December 5, 1985 is dismissed, as academic, without costs and without disbursements.

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.