Judicial Insight
Back to feed
(defendants' restricted records limit stands)CivilCourt of AppealsAppeal

Hoskins v. Hoskins

Court
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
Decided
Oct 2, 2026
Docket
627 CA 25-01822
Judges
Not listed
Cited as2026 NY Slip Op 05649
Detailed analysis & 3-line summary

AI breakdown

Analyzed Oct 3, 2026

Where this case stands

  1. Supreme Court: granted defendants' motion to limit records to after May 8, 2020.

  2. This decision · Appeal

    (defendants' restricted records limit stands)

TL;DR

  1. 1This case is about a family disagreement over which records should be used in managing a trust.
  2. 2The court decided to limit the discovery of records to those after May 8, 2020.
  3. 3This was based on a protective order that focused on narrowing disclosure obligations.

Key issues

  1. 1

    Should defendants' disclosure obligations be limited to records after May 8, 2020?

    Holding · Yes, the court limiting disclosure to this period to streamline record examination.

Why it matters

This decision impacts how family disputes over trusts are handled, particularly regarding what historical information can be examined.

The AI breakdown is a reading aid, not legal advice. Always check the opinion for the exact wording.

If you were the judge?

Family fights over trust records: when should the clock start?

  1. 1A family dispute involves trust funds and records.
  2. 2One side wants all records, but the other pushes for a limit.
  3. 3The court must decide if records before May 8, 2020, should be included.

Should they limit trust records to after May 8, 2020?

Parties

  • Appellant

    Hoskins

  • Appellee

    Hoskins

Roles are inferred from the case caption.

Opinion of the court
Hoskins v Hoskins 2026 NY Slip Op 05649 October 2, 2026 Appellate Division, Fourth Department Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431. This decision is uncorrected and subject to revision before publication in the Official Reports. BETH L. HOSKINS, INDIVIDUALLY AND ON BEHALF OF THE JOHN T. HOSKINS LIVING TRUST, AND THE SUSAN S. HOSKINS LIVING TRUST, PLAINTIFFS-APPELLANTS, v JOHN T. HOSKINS, JR., ET AL., DEFENDANTS-RESPONDENTS. (APPEAL NO. 2.) Supreme Court of the State of New York, Appellate Division, Fourth Judicial Department Decided on October 2, 2026 627 CA 25-01822 Present: Curran, J.P., Montour, Ogden, And Skinner, JJ. ADAMS LECLAIR LLC, ROCHESTER (ANTHONY J. ADAMS OF COUNSEL), FOR PLAINTIFFS-APPELLANTS. BARCLAY DAMON LLP, BUFFALO (JAMES P. MILBRAND OF COUNSEL), FOR DEFENDANTS-RESPONDENTS. Appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Erie County (Deborah A. Chimes, J.), entered October 16, 2025. The order granted defendants' cross-motion for a protective order limiting defendants' disclosure obligations to the period after May 8, 2020. [*1] It is hereby ORDERED that the order so appealed from is unanimously affirmed without costs. Entered: October 2, 2026 Ann Dillon Flynn Clerk of the Court
View on CourtListener