- 41 -
For various reasons stated, infra, we do not credit
Tupitza's testimony. In this instance we think petitioner failed
to pursue any collection activities against Lynch and Reardon to
recover the amounts that the Orphans' Court ordered them to
refund to the estate, after the estate entered into a settlement
agreement with Reardon sometime in late 1989 or early 1990, and
after Lynch's petition in bankruptcy was dismissed on August 22,
1990.
In eight status reports filed with this Court from November
28, 1986, through September 1, 1989, the estate informed this
Court that this case had been settled and that a final decision
would be submitted when the fee dispute involving Lynch and
Reardon was concluded. As previously noted, the fee dispute
involving Lynch and Reardon was disposed of on January 15, 1991,
when the Pennsylvania Supreme Court denied Lynch's petition for
the allowance of an appeal.
In a status report filed with the Court on March 9, 1992,
respondent informed the Court:
4. Petitioner now wishes to abandon the claims
which she is defending (sic) in state court litigation
and be allowed a deduction for the entire amounts paid
on the theory that it is unlikely the estate will ever
collect the monies ordered to be repaid to the estate.
* * * * * * *
9. This report has been discussed with James
Tupitza, Esquire, counsel for petitioners (sic).
Page: Previous 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011