Defending Against Allegations of Stealing an Inheritance in New York

Reviewed by Albert Goodwin, Esq., a New York estate litigation attorney admitted in New York and Florida who has represented both fiduciaries and accused beneficiaries in Surrogate's Court contests. Last reviewed: June 2024.

Being accused of stealing an inheritance is frightening, especially when the accuser is a sibling, a co-beneficiary, or an estate's executor or administrator. In most cases, these allegations are not criminal charges — they are civil claims brought in the Surrogate's Court (or occasionally Supreme Court) to recover money or property the accuser believes belongs to a decedent's estate. This guide is written for the person being accused: it explains how these proceedings actually work in New York, the most common factual scenarios, the defenses that genuinely apply, and the practical mistakes that turn a defensible case into a losing one.

This is a defense-focused companion to our pages on the discovery and turnover proceeding and breach of fiduciary duty. If you are the one being accused of taking and hiding a parent's assets, you may also find our discussion of the accuser's perspective in a brother who took and is hiding a father's money useful for understanding how the other side builds its case.

How an Inheritance-Theft Claim Is Actually Brought in New York

There is no single cause of action called "stealing an inheritance." Instead, an executor, administrator, or beneficiary typically uses one of these vehicles:

• A discovery and turnover proceeding under SCPA 2103 and SCPA 2104. This is the most common tool. The fiduciary files a petition asking the Surrogate's Court to compel a person believed to be holding estate property to appear and answer questions, and ultimately to turn the property over.
• An action to set aside a deed or transfer for undue influence, fraud, or lack of capacity, generally filed in Supreme Court when it involves real property.
• A breach of fiduciary duty claim when the accused held a power of attorney or served as a trustee or fiduciary.
• A conversion claim, alleging the wrongful exercise of control over another's property.

Knowing which vehicle is being used matters, because the elements, the burden of proof, and the available defenses differ significantly.

The SCPA 2103/2104 Discovery and Turnover Proceeding — From the Defendant's Chair

A discovery and turnover proceeding has two distinct stages, and the strategy in each is different.

Stage one — inquiry (SCPA 2103). The fiduciary files a petition stating they have reason to believe you possess or have knowledge of property belonging to the estate. The court may order you to appear for an examination, much like a deposition, and to produce documents. At this stage the fiduciary need not prove anything — they are gathering information. A common defense mistake is to treat this examination casually. Inconsistent or careless testimony given under oath here can be used against you for the rest of the case.

Stage two — recovery (SCPA 2104). If, after the inquiry, the fiduciary believes you wrongfully hold estate property, the proceeding becomes a turnover proceeding and they must plead and prove an actual cause of action — conversion, breach of fiduciary duty, fraud, or that a transfer to you was the product of undue influence or incapacity. The burden of proof is generally on the party seeking to recover the property. A critical exception arises where the accused stood in a confidential or fiduciary relationship with the decedent (for example, holding a power of attorney): the burden can shift, requiring the accused to show the transaction was fair and free of undue influence.

Gift vs. Theft: The Central Battleground

The vast majority of inheritance-theft accusations come down to a single question: was the property a gift, or was it taken? Under New York law, a valid inter vivos (lifetime) gift requires three elements: (1) the donor's intent to make a present transfer, (2) delivery of the gift, and (3) acceptance by the recipient. Gruen v. Gruen, 68 N.Y.2d 48 (1986), is the leading New York case on this framework.

If you received money or property from a parent or relative during their life, your defense is often that it was a completed gift. To support that defense, contemporaneous evidence is everything: a gift letter, text messages, witness testimony, a pattern of similar gifts to others, or banking records showing the transfer was deliberate rather than concealed.

Personal Property Without Title (Jewelry, Cash, Art, Furniture)

Items with no record of ownership are inherently difficult for an accuser to recover. They must prove the item existed, that the decedent owned it at death, and that you wrongfully took it. Where the decedent handed an item to you during life, the gift defense is strong because the accuser usually cannot rebut delivery and intent. The accuser's burden, not your innocence, is what wins these cases.

Titled Personal Property (Vehicles)

For property requiring transfer of title, such as a car, mere possession does not transfer ownership. If you hold a vehicle still titled in the decedent's name, your defense is typically consent or authorization — that the decedent permitted you to use and possess it — or that a completed gift occurred even if the paperwork was never updated. Documentation of the decedent's intent is decisive.

Bank Accounts — Where Most Cases Are Won or Lost

Joint accounts generate more inheritance-theft litigation than any other asset. Under New York Banking Law § 675, when a bank account is opened in the names of two persons "to be paid to either, or the survivor," the law creates a rebuttable presumption that a true joint tenancy with right of survivorship was created — meaning the surviving owner takes the balance at death. This presumption is one of the strongest defenses available to a surviving joint account holder.

The accuser may try to rebut the presumption by arguing the account was a "convenience account" — opened only so you could pay the decedent's bills, not to give you any ownership. New York courts examine whether the Banking Law § 675 statutory language appeared on the signature card, who contributed and withdrew funds, and the decedent's expressed intent. See Matter of Friedman and the body of case law interpreting Banking Law § 675. If the signature card contains the survivorship language, the burden falls on the accuser to prove by clear and convincing evidence that no gift was intended. Withdrawals you made during the decedent's lifetime are treated differently from the survivorship balance and can be challenged separately, so the timing of every transaction matters.

For accounts with named pay-on-death (Totten trust) beneficiaries, the funds pass to the beneficiary outside the estate, and the executor generally has no claim to them at all.

Real Property: Defending a Challenged Deed

When an accuser claims a deed transferring real estate was "stolen," they are usually alleging the transfer was procured by undue influence, fraud, lack of capacity, or breach of fiduciary duty. To undo the deed, they must commence an action (typically in Supreme Court) to set it aside.

Key defenses include:

• Capacity. New York requires only that the grantor understood the nature and consequences of the transaction at the time of signing. Medical records, the absence of mind-altering medication or cognitive illness on the signing date, and testimony from the attorney or notary who supervised the signing are powerful.
• Absence of undue influence. Undue influence is more than persuasion; the accuser must show the decedent's free will was overpowered. A long, well-documented relationship and the decedent's independent decision-making cut against this claim.
• Statute of limitations. This is frequently the decisive defense — and the law is more nuanced than it first appears.

Statute of Limitations — The Nuance That Matters

General summaries that simply say "the statute of limitations is six years" are misleading. The correct rule depends on the cause of action:

• Fraud: Under CPLR 213(8), the period is the greater of six years from the fraud or two years from when the fraud was or should have been discovered (the discovery rule). This discovery rule can extend the deadline well past six years — but it cuts both ways, and a defendant can argue the accuser knew or should have known of the facts long ago.
• Breach of fiduciary duty: The limitations period is generally three years where money damages are sought and six years where the claim is equitable or where fraud is an essential element. The accrual point depends on the relief sought and whether the fiduciary "openly repudiated" the duty.
• Conversion: A three-year period under CPLR 214, accruing when the conversion occurs.
• Undue influence affecting a deed: Often analyzed under the six-year catch-all of CPLR 213, with accrual rules that depend on the precise theory.

Because accrual dates and the discovery rule can make or break a defense, a careful timeline of who knew what and when is one of the first things a defense lawyer builds.

Concrete (Anonymized) Defense Scenarios

Scenario 1 — The convenience-account accusation. A daughter is added to her father's checking account so she can pay his bills while he is ill. After his death, her siblings demand half the balance, claiming the account was "only for convenience." Her defense turns on the signature card: if it contains the Banking Law § 675 survivorship language, the presumption favors her, and her siblings must overcome it with clear and convincing evidence.

Scenario 2 — Lifetime gifts later called theft. A son receives regular transfers from his mother over several years. After her death, the executor alleges he "drained her accounts." His defense is documentation of donative intent — cards, messages, a consistent pattern, and the absence of concealment.

Scenario 3 — The power-of-attorney trap. A child held a power of attorney and used it to transfer property to themselves. Because of the fiduciary relationship, the burden may shift to that child to prove the gift to self was actually authorized and fair. New York's statutory power of attorney form requires a separate "Statutory Gifts Rider" or specific gifting authority; a self-gift without that authority is highly vulnerable. This is one of the hardest postures to defend and demands counsel early.

What to Do the Moment You Are Accused

• Preserve everything. Bank statements, texts, emails, gift letters, medical records, and the account signature cards. Do not delete anything — spoliation can be devastating.
• Do not return property as an "admission." Returning assets before understanding your rights can be treated as conceding the claim.
• Do not give an informal statement. Statements made to the executor's lawyer or in a casual SCPA 2103 examination can lock you into a position.
• Build a timeline. The statute of limitations and the gift-versus-theft question both depend on dates.
• Get counsel before the examination. The discovery stage shapes the entire case.

Common Mistakes That Sink a Defense

• Treating the SCPA 2103 examination as informal and giving inconsistent testimony.
• Failing to locate the signature card that establishes Banking Law § 675 survivorship.
• Letting the statute-of-limitations clock be miscalculated by ignoring accrual and discovery-rule nuances.
• Commingling gifted funds so they cannot be traced.
• Using a power of attorney to make self-gifts without statutory gifting authority.

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I be sued for taking my parent's money before they died?

Yes. An executor or administrator can bring a turnover proceeding or a fraud, conversion, or breach of fiduciary duty claim over lifetime transfers. Your defense is usually that the money was a completed gift, that you were a true joint owner with right of survivorship under Banking Law § 675, or that the claim is time-barred. Whether you held a power of attorney matters enormously, because it can shift the burden onto you.

Is a joint account a defense if I am the surviving owner?

It can be a strong one. Where the signature card contains the survivorship language required by Banking Law § 675, New York presumes a true joint account with right of survivorship, and the balance passes to you at death. The accuser must then prove, by clear and convincing evidence, that it was only a "convenience account." Lifetime withdrawals are analyzed separately.

What is the difference between undue influence and fraud?

Fraud involves a knowing misrepresentation the decedent relied on. Undue influence involves overpowering the decedent's free will so the transfer reflects the influencer's wishes rather than the decedent's. They carry different proof standards and, importantly, different statute-of-limitations rules.

Is an inheritance-theft accusation criminal?

Usually not. Most are civil disputes in Surrogate's Court. Criminal larceny charges are possible in egregious cases, but the typical proceeding seeks the return of property, not jail time.

How long does the accuser have to sue me?

It depends on the claim: roughly three years for conversion, three to six years for breach of fiduciary duty depending on relief, and six years for fraud — or two years from discovery of the fraud if that is later. The accrual date often decides the case.

Speak With a New York Estate Litigation Attorney

Defending against an allegation of stealing an inheritance requires more than a general denial — it requires marshaling the right statutes, the right documents, and the right testimony before the other side locks you into a position. The Law Offices of Albert Goodwin defends beneficiaries, surviving joint account holders, and agents under powers of attorney in Surrogate's Court proceedings across New York. We have offices in New York City, Brooklyn, and Queens. Call 212-233-1233 or email [email protected].

This article is for general information about New York law and is not legal advice. The application of these rules depends on the specific facts of your case.