Hauke case Probate court could impose surcharge on executor even after release signed

Probate court could impose surcharge on executor even after release signed
In the Matter of the Estate of Hauke
The co-executors of the estates of Rudolph and Helen Hauke appealed from the trial court's judgment ruling that a release did not bar the imposition of surcharges on the co-executors.
Compliments of
KENNETH VERCAMMEN & ASSOCIATES, PC
ATTORNEY AT LAW
732-572-0500
2053 Woodbridge Ave.
Edison, NJ 08817
More information at www.njlaws.com
In a prior decision, the court affirmed a chancery division judgment that approved formal accounting for the estates. The judgment imposed substantial surcharges on the co-executors. However, the court remanded for the chancery division to determine if a mutual release signed by the co-executors and their brother in a settlement of a prior chancery division litigation precluded the imposition of the surcharges. On remand, the chancery court ruled that the release did not bar the surcharges, or alternatively, that the co-executors had waived their claim to rely on the release to preclude the imposition of surcharges.
On appeal, the court affirmed the chancery court's ruling. Although the release precluded the co-executors' brother from seeking reimbursement of his attorneys' fees, the court noted that the chancery court's underlying judgment did not award the co-executors' brother any legal fees. Instead, the court found that the surcharge merely directed the co-executors to pay the legal fees of another party. Finally, the court rejected co-executors' brother's contention that the chancery division failed to consider the imposition of sanctions for co-executors' delay in raising the issue of their release, noting that co-executors' brother made no request for sanctions to the chancery court.
Source https://www.law.com/njlawjournal/almI...
NOT FOR PUBLICATION WITHOUT THE APPROVAL OF THE APPELLATE DIVISION
This opinion shall not "constitute precedent or be binding upon any court." Although it is posted on the internet, this opinion is binding only on the parties in the case and its use in other cases is limited. R. 1:36-3.
SUPERIOR COURT OF NEW JERSEY APPELLATE DIVISION
DOCKET NO. A-4528-19
IN THE MATTER OF THE ESTATE OF RUDOLPH HAUKE, deceased, AND OF THE RUDOLPH HAUKE FAMILY REMAINDER TRUST AND MARITAL TRUST,
and
IN THE MATTER OF THE ESTATE OF HELEN HAUKE, deceased, AND OF THE
RUDOLPH HAUKE FAMILY REMAINDER TRUST AND MARITAL TRUST. ______________________________
Argued January 18, 2022 – Decided January 31, 2022
Before Judges Fasciale and Vernoia.
On appeal from the Superior Court of New Jersey, Chancery Division, Monmouth County, Docket Nos. P-000323-16 and P-000324-16.
PER CURIAM