In re the Est. of Nealon, 4 N.E.3d 363 (NY 2014). · Go Syfert
In re the Est. of Nealon, 4 N.E.3d 363 (NY 2014). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
29 citation events (29 in the last 25 years) across 3 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: Matter of Estate of Mielty (Mielty) (nyappdiv, 2026-06-05)
Treatment trajectory · 2014 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
2014 2020 2026
Top citers, strongest first. 5 distinct citers. How cited ↗
discussed Cited "see" Matter of Estate of Mielty (Mielty)
N.Y. App. Div. · 2026 · signal: see · confidence high
In any event, on the merits, we conclude in both appeals that petitioner's own proof establishes that there are triable issues of fact regarding the existence of a confidential relationship and undue influence ( see Matter of Rozof , 219 AD3d 1428, 1430 [2d Dept 2023]; see generally Matter of Nealon , 104 AD3d 1088 , 1089 [3d Dept 2013], affd 22 NY3d 1045 [2014]; Matter of Dibble , 243 AD3d 993 , 995 [3d Dept 2025]).
discussed Cited "see" Matter of Kotsones
N.Y. App. Div. · 2020 · signal: see · confidence high
Indeed, a confidential relationship has been described as "one that is of such a character as to render it certain that [the parties] do not deal on terms of equality' " ( Matter of Bonczyk v Williams , 119 AD3d 1124, 1125 [3d Dept 2014]; see Matter of Nealon , 104 AD3d 1088 , 1089 [3d Dept 2013], affd 22 NY3d 1045 [2014]).
discussed Cited "see" Bonczyk v. Williams
N.Y. App. Div. · 2014 · signal: see · confidence high
A confidential relationship is one that is “of such a character as to render it certain that [the parties] do not deal on terms of equality” (Matter of Gordon v Bialystoker Ctr. & Bikur Cholim, 45 NY2d 692, 698-699 [1978]). 2 .Such inequality may occur from either one party’s “superior knowledge of the matter derived from a fiduciary relation, or from an overmastering influence” or from the other’s “weakness, dependence, or trust justifiably reposed” on the stronger party (id. at 699; see Matter of Nealon, 104 AD3d 1088 , 1089 [2013], affd 22 NY3d 1045 [2014]).
discussed Cited "see" MatterofBonczykvWilliams
N.Y. App. Div. · 2014 · signal: see · confidence high
A confidential relationship is one that is "of such a character as to render it certain that [the parties] do not deal on terms of equality" (Matter of Gordon v Bialystoker Ctr. & Bikur Cholim, 45 NY2d 692, 698-699 [1978]).2 Such inequality may occur from either one party's "superior knowledge of the matter derived from a fiduciary relation, or from an overmastering 1 At oral argument, petitioner's counsel confirmed that, during the pendency of this appeal, Supreme Court clarified that, as a matter of law, there was a fiduciary relationship between respondent and decedent. 2 In Matter of Gordo…
discussed Cited "see" Bonczyk v. Williams
N.Y. App. Div. · 2014 · signal: see · confidence high
A confidential relationship is one that is “of such a character as to render it certain that [the parties] do not deal on terms of equality” (Matter of Gordon v Bialystoker Ctr. & Bikur Cholim, 45 NY2d 692, 698-699 [1978]). 2 .Such inequality may occur from either one party’s “superior knowledge of the matter derived from a fiduciary relation, or from an overmastering influence” or from the other’s “weakness, dependence, or trust justifiably reposed” on the stronger party (id. at 699; see Matter of Nealon, 104 AD3d 1088 , 1089 [2013], affd 22 NY3d 1045 [2014]).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
In the Matter of the Estate of Muriel M. Nealon, Christopher J. Nealon, as of Muriel M. Nealon, Appellant Peter J. Nealon, and Tracey McGann, Now Known as Tracey Nealon
New York Court of Appeals.
Jan 9, 2014.
4 N.E.3d 363
APPEARANCES OF COUNSEL, Nicholas E. Tishler, Niskayuna, for appellant., Murphy, Burns, Barber & Murphy, LLP, Albany (Peter G. Barber and Catherine A. Barber of counsel), for Tracey Nealon, respondent.
Abdus, Graffeo, Lippman, Pigott, Read, Rivera, Salaam, Smith.
Cited by 22 opinions  |  Published

OPINION OF THE COURT

On review of submissions pursuant to section 500.11 of the Rules of the Court of Appeals (22 NYCRR 500.11), order affirmed, with costs, and judgment absolute dismissing the petition granted upon petitioner’s stipulation. The Appellate Division correctly determined that the issue whether a confidential relationship existed should have been submitted to the jury.

Concur: Chief Judge Lippman and Judges Graffeo, Read, Smith, Pigott, Rivera and Abdus-Salaam.