MHL ARTICLE 81 - New York State Unified Court System

Matter of Williams, 12 Misc.3d 1191A; 824 N.Y.S.2d 770 (Sup. Ct., Kings Cty., 2006)(Belen,
J.)
The court found clear and convincing evidence that appointment of a guardian was needed to protect
a "strong willed and fiercely independent [90 year old] woman with sharp intelligence and great
charm" whose physical limitations rendered her without "the strength, vigor, and physical capacity
to handle her assets, her apartment and herself" due to her chronic pulmonary disease,
hyperthyroidism, difficulty seeing and making herself understood and inability to walk more than
short distances, even with the aid of a walker." She had been found by a psychiatrist to be alert and
oriented and without signs of psychiatric illness or dementia and listened attentively and testified
cogently during the hearing. She had pieced together a functioning household for herself with an
informal network of people from her church and her family whose assistance allowed her to live in
her own apartment but they lacked the legal standing and the close personal bonds to protect her
from certain opportunistic individuals who had taken advantage of her. Although "her judgment
ha[d] been questionable in some of her past dealings and her recent history [was] rife with incidents
where her good and trusting nature had been abused", the court declined to make a finding of mental
incapacity but rather found that due to the ravages of age and physical incapacity she had become
reliant upon the good will and aid of others to perform the functions of everyday life, "had become
extremely vulnerable to abuse and predatory behavior" and thus was at risk and did not fully
comprehend the degree and consequences of such risk.
Matter of A.C., 12 Misc. 3d 1190A; 824 N.Y.S.2d 767 (Sup. Ct., Bronx Cty., 2006) (Hunter, J.)
Where 87 years old AIP had significant physical limitations and “mild to moderate cognitive
impairment” and required a great deal of assistance, but was receiving that assistance from a home
health aide, had appointed her niece as heath care agent, had drafted a Last Will and Testament and
had not yet given a Power of Attorney to her but still had the capacity and willingness to do so and
was aware of the extent of her assets, the Court denied the guardianship application finding that the
AIP had sufficient alternative resources.
Matter of Ardelia R., 28 A.D.3d 485, 812 N.Y.S.2d 140 (2nd Dept., 2006)
AIP was properly found to be incapacitated . She was 82-years old, found in her home by APS
without running water, food, electricity, or heat, malodorous and frail. She was unable to cook, and
was known to wander away from her home. She had forgotten where she banked and did not know
her sources of income. Although she owned a home and possessed approximately $115,000 in
savings, she was delinquent on her utility bills. Based on these facts, the hearing record established
by clear and convincing evidence that AIP lacked the understanding or appreciation of the nature and
consequences of her functional limitations. Thus, the Supreme Court's finding that she was an
incapacitated person requiring a guardian was proper notwithstanding the lack of medical testimony
regarding her medical condition.
33