ESTATE OF ROSLYN HOCHMAN, Deceased — In this SCPA 2103 proceeding, one of the respondents moves for an order permitting late filing of his objections, and another respondent opposes the motion.

The movant alleges that, although his objections were not timely filed with the court, a copy of them was served on counsel for all parties on the return date of process in this proceeding, and e-mailed to them. The movant, who was the decedent's article 81 guardian also asserts that his objections are meritorious because "he did not act in tandem or concert" with the respondent who is opposing the instant motion and if the respondent misappropriated any of the decedent's funds the movant should not be held liable for her acts. The opposing respondent argues that the movant merely wants to delay this matter further rather than accept any responsibility or liability for destroying her parents' assets due to the neglect of movant's duties as the decedent's court appointed guardian.

Clearly all of the parties were aware of movant's intent to file objections and no one denies that, in fact, they were served with his objections. Nor has anyone established that the short delay caused any prejudice, or that he would clearly be responsible for any improper acts of another.

Accordingly, this decision constitutes the order of the court granting the motion. The movant shall serve and file verified objections by December 21, 2012.

The Chief Clerk is directed to mail a copy of this decision and order to all counsel who appeared in the proceeding.

December 4, 2012