MHL ARTICLE 81 - New York State Unified Court System

with an independent co-guardian of the property and the son as guardian of the person along with
an independent co-guardian of the person. The court notes that it is mindful of the history of
confrontation and disagreement between the siblings and the potential for further conflict between
them in their roles as guardians. The court stated that it therefore appointed independent coguardians
to exert a moderating influence.
Matter of Bertha W., 1 A.D. 3d 603; 767 N.Y.S.2d 657 (2nd Dept., 2003)
Appellate Division modifies order to eliminate appointment of non-family member co-guardian of
the property stating that there is a preference for family members unless it is impossible to find a
qualified family member to serve and that there was no showing that the AIP’s nephew required a
co-guardian to assist him in carrying our his duties.
Matter of Cuban (Carmen Castro), NYLJ, 11/4/03 (Sup. Ct., Queens Cty.) (Thomas,J)
Co-guardian A is sanctioned for contempt of court, incarcerated for 7 days and directed to pay
attorneys fees for Co-guardian B of $15,000 for impeding Co-guardian B’s access to the IP (their
mother) to provide for her medical care. Co-guardian A concealed the legal authority to act of Coguardian
B to EMT technicians.
rd
Matter of Mary “J”., 290 A.D.2d 847; 736 N.Y.S.2d 542 (3 Dept., 2002)
Appellate Division held that where family member that AIP preferred to have as guardian was
moving out of state and remaining siblings remained in local area where AIP had resided all her life,
the hearing court properly appointed the two siblings as co-guardians, despite the AIP’s wish to the
contrary.
Matter of Priviteri (Goldstein), NYLJ, 10/29/95, p. 27, col. 3 (Bronx Sup.)(Friedman, J.)
Where petitioner for guardianship of property was AIP’s presumptive heir, there was conflict of
interest because guardian stood to seek to enlarge estate for his own benefit, rather than that of ward.
After considering size of estate, nature and closeness of familial relationship between proposed
guardian and AIP, proposed guardian’s financial circumstances, and motivation of proposed
guardian, court avoided appearance of impropriety and conflict of interest by appointing AIP’s sister
as personal needs guardian and nephew plus a co-guardian to be appointed later as her property
management guardian.
st
In re: Robinson, 272 A.D.2d 176; 709 N.Y.S. 170 (1 Dept., 2000)
Court appoints co-guardian who is living out of the country temporarily, stating that modern
transportation and communication will enable him to serve adequately.
152