In re the Intermediate Accounting of Galasso
N.Y.
Citation analytics
How this case sits in the citation network, derived from CiteLaw's graph of published opinions.
Citations by decade
Courts citing this case
Most recently cited by10
- 2026Tivoli BI LLC. v. Andrews Civ. Ct. NYC, Kings Cty.
- 2026Department of Hous. Preserv. & Dev. v. Silvershore Props. 95 LLC Civ. Ct. NYC, Queens Cty.
- 2025Tear Drops of Elegance, Inc v. 2232-2240 ACP Owner, LLC N.Y. Sup. Ct., New York Cty.
- 2024Nogueira v. Ery Retail Podium LLC N.Y. Sup. Ct., New York Cty.
- 2021Rora LLC v. 404 East 79th Street Lender LLC E.D.N.Y
- 2018GHR Co., LLC v. Sannon N.Y. App. Term.
- 2017McClorey v. McClorey N.Y. App. Div.
- 2015Rogers v. Malik N.Y. App. Div.
- 2015George W. & Dacie Clements Agricultural Research Institute, Inc. v. Green N.Y. App. Div.
- 2015HSBC Bank USA v. Wielgus N.Y. App. Div.
Counts reflect decisions in the CiteLaw corpus and may lag very recent opinions.
Opinion
In the Matter of the Intermediate Accounting of Leonard Galasso as Coadministrator of the Estate of Millie Galasso, Also Known as Carmela Galasso, Deceased, Appellant. Peter Galasso, Respondent.
Attorneys
- Daniel J. Pinsky for appellant.
- John J. Finn for respondent.
Millie Galasso died intestate on January 31, 1966. Letters of administration were issued on February 24, 1966 to two sons, Peter Galasso and Leonard Galasso. They, together with two other children of the decedent, were distributees of the estate. On October 2, 1970, Leonard Galasso filed an intermediate accounting, to which Peter Gralasso filed objections. Thereafter, on May 9, 1972, the Surrogate’s Court, Bronx County, denied specific performance of a stipulation off settlement of all objections purportedly entered into on February 15, 1972.
The parties to this proceeding, after several'hearings, entered into a purported stipulation which was read into the record. By the terms of the stipulation, inter alia, Leonard Gralasso agreed to purchase for $15,000 the one-fourth interest in certain real property owned by his brother Peter. Less than a month later, Leonard Gralasso notified the objectant’s attorneys that circumstances had arisen which made it necessary for him to withdraw his offer to purchase his interest in the real property. Peter Gralasso then moved for an order directing Leonard to perform all the terms of the alleged stipulation of settlement made in open court and for specific performance of said settlement.
While it is true, as the Appellate Division noted, that stipulations of settlement are favored by the courts and will not be set aside in the absence of fraud or overreaching (cf. Matter of Hecht, 24 A D 2d 1001), we are unable to agree with the Appellate Division that the stipulation, as it appears from the record, was “ definite and complete ” (Matter of Dolgin Eldert Corp., 31 N Y 2d 1, 10). What is clear from the record is that on February 11 and 15, 1972, the parties made an effort to reach such a stipulation. Nevertheless, on both days the parties were unable to agree to the withdrawal of all objections, and it cannot be said that a finally agreed upon stipulation was reached. We find very persuasive in this regard the fact that the Surrogate who participated in the purported settlement remarked towards the end of the February 15 hearing that “ I am still not sure it’s settled.” Counsel for the accountant replied with similar uncertainty, “ I hope this matter will be settled.” As we noted under analogous circumstances in Matter of Dolgin Eldert Corp. (supra, p. 11), “ [a]t best, it was an agreement to agree to the amplified terms of a future writing ”.
Accordingly, the order of the Appellate Division should be reversed, without costs, and the order of the Surrogate’s Court, Bronx County, reinstated.
Chief Judge Breitel and Judges Gtabrielli, Jones, Waohtler and Rabin concur; Judge Stevens taking no part.
Order reversed, without costs against the estate or any party, and order of Surrogate’s Court, Bronx County, reinstated.