Abercrombie v. Andrew College

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• stating that plaintiffs mere statement that the property at issue was part of the decedent’s estate upon her death did “not divest th[e] [c]ourt of jurisdiction”
• noting that claims of breach of fiduciary duty are typically not amenable to resolution on motions to dismiss because they involve fact-specific inquiries
• noting that because the “action was first filed in New York Supreme Court, ... it [was] difficult to understand how ... only the [surrogate’s court should adjudicate th[e] case”
• dismissing cause of action because plaintiff failed to identify facts of fraudulent concealment other than those pertinent to the underlying cause of action that would invoke equitable estoppel
• distinguishing between disputes regarding inter vives transfers and disputes regarding property that is undisputedly part of the estate under the probate exception
• \[T]he elements of a breach of fiduciary duty based in fraud must be plead with particularity.\

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).