91 N.Y.2d 591 (1998)
r
r
The subject matter jurisdiction of a New York Surrogate’s Court in an ancillary administration proceeding is generally limited to property located within New York State, even when ancillary letters are issued based on a small in-state bank account.
r
r
Summary
r
The New York Court of Appeals addressed whether a New York Surrogate’s Court had subject matter jurisdiction over assets located in the Cayman Islands. The ancillary administrator of an estate sought to discover and gain control of assets held in a Cayman Islands trust, arguing that the funds were improperly transferred after the decedent’s death. The ancillary letters of administration were issued in New York based solely on the existence of a small bank account within the state. The Court held that the Surrogate’s Court’s jurisdiction in an ancillary proceeding does not extend to assets located outside of New York, even if the ancillary administration is intended to facilitate discovery of those assets. The court emphasized the limited and supplementary nature of ancillary proceedings.
r
r
Facts
r
Oscar Obregon, while a resident of New York, opened an investment account with Morgan Stanley-London. He later sought to establish a trust in the Cayman Islands with Barclays Private Bank, using funds from the London account. Obregon executed a letter of instruction for the creation of the “Faygate Trust.” Shortly after, Obregon committed suicide in Texas. Following his death, funds from his London account were transferred to the Faygate Trust at Barclays Private Bank in the Cayman Islands. The only asset of Obregon located in NY was a small bank account with $1,405.
r
r
Procedural History
r
Ancillary letters of administration were issued to Joel Stern in New York based on the small bank account. Stern then initiated a proceeding in Surrogate’s Court to discover and recover the funds in the Cayman Islands trust. The Surrogate’s Court denied motions to dismiss, asserting jurisdiction over the Cayman Islands trust. The Appellate Division reversed, holding that the Surrogate’s Court lacked subject matter jurisdiction over the extraterritorial assets. The New York Court of Appeals granted leave to appeal.
r
r
Issue(s)
r
Whether the subject matter jurisdiction of a New York Surrogate’s Court, in an ancillary administration proceeding, extends to assets located outside of New York State when the issuance of ancillary letters is predicated solely on a small bank account within the state.
r
r
Holding
r
No, because the subject matter jurisdiction of the Surrogate’s Court in an ancillary proceeding is limited to property situated within New York State.
r
r
Court’s Reasoning
r
The Court reasoned that the purpose of ancillary administration is to assist the primary administration in the domiciliary jurisdiction, not to supplant it. The Court stated that SCPA article 16 explicitly declares that