MHL ARTICLE 81 - New York State Unified Court System

Matter of Isaiah Jenkins, NYLJ, 6/2/03, p. 33, col. 5 (Surr. Scarpino)
Surrogate’s Court has the authority to review an SNT and determine whether its terms satisfy
applicable statutory requirements and case authority (EPTL 71.12; OBRA 93, 42 USC
§1396p[d][4][A]; SSL §366[2][b][2]. This review protects the incapacitated person’s interest and
ensures the fulfillment of fiduciary obligations and compliance with the controlling laws and rules
regarding eligibility for government benefits.
g. Reformation of Trusts to SNTs
Estate of Joseph B. Sieminski, Deceased, 7/6/10, NYLJ, 40 (col. 5) (Surr. Ct Suff. Cty.) (Surr.
Czygier)
Court reformed a testamentary trust to an SNT because it found that this trust was created before
enactment of the State and Federal Legislation creating SNT’s and that reformation effectuated the
grantor’s intent to prevent the beneficiary from losing his government benefits.
Estate of Luckner Polycarpe, 4/1/2010 NYLJ 41, (col. 6)(Surr. Ct., Queens Cty.) (Surrogate
Nahman)
Surrogate reformed a testamentary trust established for the benefit of the decedent's spouse, so that
the trust could be administered as a SNT in conformity with the provisions of EPTL §7-1.12 in the
event she were to develop a severe and chronic or persistent disability during the term of the trust.
Matter of Rappaport, 21 Misc.3d 919; 866 N.Y.S.2d 483 (Sup. Ct. Nass. Cty. 2008) (Riordan,
J.)
The court permitted reformation of a testamentary trust into an SNT.
Estate of Newman, 18 Misc.3d 1118A; 856 N.Y.S.2d 500 (Surr Ct., Bronx Cty, 2008)
(Surr. Holzman)
Court reformed a testamentary trust to an SNT because it found that the reformation effectuated the
grantor’s intent to prevent exhaustion of the trust by use of trust funds to pay for expenses already
covered by government benefits.
Matter of Estate of Longhine, 15 Misc.3d 1106A; 836 N.Y.S.2d 500 (Surr. Ct., Wyoming Cty.,
2007)(Surr. Griffith)
Surrogate permits reformation of a testamentary trust into 3rd party SNT where the affidavit of the
drafting attorney showed that creation of an SNT was not presented to the testator due to the lack of
time between the onset of his final illness and his death, but that the testator was the sole caretaker
for his disabled son, his son was receiving public benefits that he would lose due to the inheritance,
the bulk of the estate was real property and the testator would likely have chosen to create an SNT
83