In the Matter of The Estate of Mark Rothko, Deceased. Kate Rothko et al., Respondents; Bernard J. Reis et al., as Executors of Mark Rothko, Deceased, Appellants-Respondents; Attorney-General of the State of New York, Respondent-Appellant
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York, First Department.https://leagle.com/images/logo.png
March 28, 1977
March 28, 1977
Attorney(s) appearing for the Case
Edward J. Ross of counsel (James R. Peterson with him on the brief; Breed, Abbott & Morgan, attorneys), for Kate Rothko, respondent.
Arthur Richenthal of counsel (Richenthal, Abrams & Moss, attorneys), for Theodoros Stamos and another, appellants-respondents.
Bernard H. Greene of counsel (Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison, attorneys), for Morton Levine, appellant-respondent.
David W. Peck of counsel (John W. Dickey, David M. Olasov and Pamela S. Dwyer, with him on the brief; Sullivan & Cromwell, attorneys), for Marlborough Gallery, Inc., and others, appellants-respondents.
Gustave Harrow of counsel (Laura Werner with him on the brief; Louis J. Lefkowitz, Attorney-General), for ultimate charitable beneficiaries, respondent-appellant.
Gerald Dickler of counsel (Paul Sarno with him on the brief; Hall, Dickler, Lawler, Kent & Howley, attorneys), for Barbara B. Northrup, as guardian of the person and property of Christopher Rothko, respondent.
Judith A. Ripps-Goldstone of counsel (George DeSipio with her on the brief; Cleary, Gottlieb, Steen & Hamilton, attorneys), for Mark Rothko Foundation, Inc., respondent.
MURPHY, J., concurs with LANE, J.; KUPFERMAN, J. P., concurs in part and dissents in part in an opinion; CAPOZZOLI and NUNEZ, JJ., dissent in part in separate opinions.
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York, First Department.
LANE, J.
We would affirm the decree with one modification (to be discussed later), on the comprehensive opinion of Surrogate MIDONICK (84 Misc.2d 830). However, a few additional comments are necessary to clarify our position.
We are all in agreement that the executors Reis and Stamos had a conflict of interest and divided loyalty in view of their nexus to Marlborough...
Let's get started
Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting Sign on now to see your case. Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.
Updated daily.
Uncompromising quality.
Complete, Accurate, Current.
Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full
text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.
Cited Cases
No Cases Found
Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the
full text of the citing case.
