Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
The Surrogate overruled Mullane's objections, and entered a decree accepting the accounting and terminating any rights the beneficiaries may have had against Central Hanover for mismanagement of the trust. The New York Supreme Court Appellate Division subsequently affirmed, as did the New York Court of Appeals.
Family Court does not have jurisdiction over divorces, which must be litigated in the Supreme Court (which is a trial court, rather than the highest court which would be the New York Court of Appeals) and although Criminal Court domestic violence parts typically hear all cases involving crimes against intimate partners (whether opposite- or ...
With a living trust or family trust, you can create rules on how your estate is distributed without hefty costs and publicity of probate court. There are many nuances with trust rules, so speak ...
In June 2024, Nevada Second Judicial District Court probate commissioner Edmund Gorman Jr. ruled that Murdoch could amend the trust if he could argue that "he is acting in good faith and for the sole benefit of his heirs," according to The New York Times, [3] which also reported that Rupert Murdoch Snr wants his companies to remain politically ...
The original criminal nature of family courts was slowly replaced by an impliedly civil approach, starting in the 1930s with a New York law designed to treat nonsupport cases as a civil matter. [2] The shift to civil nonsupport across the country and the addition of divorce jurisdiction led to family court dockets becoming more civil in nature. [2]
The Surrogate's Court of the State of New York handles all probate and estate proceedings in the New York State Unified Court System. All wills are probated in this court and all estates of people who die without a will are handled in this court. Unclaimed property of the deceased without wills is handled by the Judge of this court.
In its order, the court listed as one of the questions to be briefed by the applicant, the PTO, and the amici curiae was "Whether the court should reconsider State Street Bank & Trust Co. v. Signature Financial Group, Inc., 149 F.3d 1368 (Fed. Cir. 1998) . . . in which the court had held that business methods could be patented, and whether th ...
Mr Tom Boardman was the solicitor of a family trust. [1] The trust assets include a 27% holding in a company (a textile company with factories in Coventry, Nuneaton and in Australia through a subsidiary). Boardman was concerned about the accounts of the company, and thought that to protect the trust a majority shareholding is required.