MHL ARTICLE 81 - New York State Unified Court System

to raise any disputed issues of fact.
Matter of Harry Y., 62 A.D.3d 892; 2009 NY App Div LEXIS 3906 (2nd Dept 2009)
The Appellate Division held that the trial court had erred in dismissing an interested party’s
objections to the guardian's final accounting and settling the account where the objection raised a
question of fact concerning the guardian’s possible mismanagement of the IP’s portfolio due to a
steep reduction of its value as compared to the inventory value. The Appellate Division remitted the
matter for a hearing on this issue.
Matter of Swingearn (Nassau County Department of Social Services), 873 N.Y.S.2d 165 (2nd
Dept. 2009)
During the final accounting phase of an Article 81 proceeding, the nursing home that had provided
care to the IP prior to her death cross-moved to have the court declare the priority of its claim for
reimbursement for unpaid medical expenses over DSS’s claim for reimbursement of incorrectly paid
Medicaid.. The Appellate Division held that pursuant to SSL 104 (1), DSS’ claim had priority over
the nursing home's claim which was a claim of only a “general creditor” and that contrary to the
nursing home's contention, DSS was not required to bring a separate action or proceeding to recoup
Medicaid benefits; it was sufficient to preserve its claim by asserting it in the guardianship
proceeding notwithstanding the incapacitated person's subsequent death nor was any formal
determination or fair hearing establishing DSS’s claim, as pursuant to SSL 104.
In the Matter of Campione, 58 A.D.3d 1032; 872 N.Y.S. 2d 210 (3rd Dept. 2009)
The appellate court affirmed the orders of the trial court directing the former guardian to turn over
certain assets to the administrator of the deceased IP’ estate, denying her a commission and
surcharging her for the cost of the accounting proceeding. The IP’s heirs challenged the accounting
and met their burden of going forward by submitting the final accounting of a successor guardian
which detailed in excess of $700,000 in assets not contained in the former guardian’s final
accounting, which assets the former guardian admitted depositing into accounts in her own name.
Matter of Mary XX, 52 A.D.3d 983; 860 N.Y.S. 2d 656 (3rd Dept. 2008)
The Appellate Division had previously held that a guardian-of-the-person of this IP who had no
powers over the property, was nevertheless entitled to an accounting by the trustee bank of a
intervivos trust for the benefit of the IP because as guardian of the person she needed the information
to determine how to best provide for the IP. The trustee bank prepared and filed the accounting and
commenced this proceeding to judicially settle it. The trial court appointed a GAL protect the IP’s
financial interest in the accounting and the GAL filed objections to the accounting. The guardian
of the person also filed objections. The trial court held that she was without standing to do so as she
did not have any powers over the property and that the filing of objections went beyond the scope
of the rationale set forth in the prior appeal for providing her with the information she needed to
carry out her role as guardian of the person. On appeal by the guardian of the person, the Appellate
241