IN RE: the Guardianship of Robert R. (2026)

In this proceeding brought pursuant to SCPA article 17-A, Thomas R. (Thomas) and Diane R. (Diane) petition this court for: (1) the dissolution of the guardianship of Robert R. (Robert), previously adjudicated as a person with a developmental disability pursuant to SCPA article 17-A; (2) the revocation of the letters of guardianship of the person and property of Robert issued to Thomas and Diane; (3) the revocation of the appointment of Jeanne M. (Jeanne) and Timothy M. (Timothy) as co-standby guardians; (4) the revocation of the appointment of Kiel D. (Kiel) as first alternate standby guardian; and (5) the restoration of Robert's full legal capacity. The application is made on consent of all interested parties. For the reasons set forth below, the relief requested in the petition is granted.

On January 24, 2011, this court awarded letters of guardianship of Robert's person and property to his parents, Thomas and Diane. The court further nominated Jeanne, Robert's aunt, as standby guardian, and Gary K. (Gary), Robert's uncle, as first alternate standby guardian. Subsequent to his appointment as first alternate standby guardian, Gary filed a renunciation. On November 22, 2022, this court modified the guardianship to add Timothy, Robert's uncle, as co-standby guardian with Jeanne, and to replace Gary with Kiel, Robert's cousin, as first alternate standby guardian.

In support of the original application for guardianship, Thomas and Diane submitted affidavits of a physician and a licensed psychologist, which confirmed diagnoses of developmental language disorder, executive skills disorder and mood disorder. Further, the psychologist submitted a Neuropsychological Report performed on June 4, 2010, in which he reported that Robert's impaired ability to engage in systemic problem solving and his mood disorder significantly impaired his judgment. Also at that time, Mental Hygiene Legal Service (MHLS) as counsel for Robert (see SCPA 1754[1]) reported that they did not object to the relief requested.

As part of the instant petition, Thomas and Diane report that Robert is now able to care for himself personally and financially, and utilizes an appropriate support system to assist him when necessary. Robert is now 34 years old and lives independently with his partner and their young son. He not only cares for himself, but also for his son including a routine of music classes, cooking family meals, managing finances, and engaging socially with friends and family. Robert also manages his own health needs including doctor's appointments. Robert is employed as a chef part-time and is seeking full time employment.

Also included in the application is the affirmation in support of terminating the guardianship by Joel Krooks, Esq. Attorney Krooks asserts that the record before the court supports the application under the applicable law in that Robert has the functional ability to manage his own affairs. Robert is aware of his limitations, and has expressed his intention to seek guidance or assistance in decision making when needed. Robert's intentions therefore demonstrate his maturity, self-awareness and growth to the extent that a guardianship is no longer appropriate.

The court held a hearing on June 17, 2026 in which Robert and Diane appeared with counsel. By affidavit and in his court appearance, Robert confirmed the facts in the petition, including that he has lived independently since 2016, and now lives with his partner and their son. He acknowledged that when he was younger he had significant delays in language and executive functioning due to his developmental disability. As he has matured, he has learned to act independently despite his developmental disability, and upon the dissolution of the guardianship, he intends to execute a health care proxy and power of attorney, and utilize other supports when necessary to assist him in decision making. He currently manages his own finances as well as for the family household. He manages his daily routine including travel to work, care for his son, cooking for his family and performing all of his own activities of daily living.

The court was impressed with Robert's ability to express and advocate for himself. Diane confirmed Robert's testimony, and reiterated her and Thomas's support for the termination of the guardianship.

SCPA 1759 provides for modification, amendment or dissolution of a guardianship order and discharge of a guardian (see SCPA 1759). On an application to revoke guardianship letters under SCPA article 17-A, the burden of proving that the guardianship is not in the best interests of the person with a developmental or intellectual disability is on the petitioner (Matter of Capurso, 63 Misc 3d 725 [Sur Ct, Westchester County 2019]). As with all guardianship matters, the guiding principle is what is in the best interests of the person with an intellectual or developmental disability, with the determination of what is in the best interest committed to the discretion of the court (Matter of Capurso, 63 Misc 3d at 728; Matter of Robert C.B., 68 Misc 3d 704 [Sur Ct, Dutchess County 2020] rev'd on other grounds 207 AD3d 464 [2d Dept 2022]; see also SCPA 1754 [5]). Although a guardianship established pursuant to SCPA 17-A typically continues for the lifetime of the person with a disability, where evidence demonstrates that there are less restrictive alternatives to meet the person's needs and that it is in the best interests of the person to do so, the courts have terminated the guardianship and restored the person's full rights (see e.g. Matter of Maria M., NYLJ, Jan. 22, 2026 at 17 col. 3 [Sur Ct, Suffolk County 2026]; Matter of Capurso, 63 Misc 3d 725; Matter of Richard S.H., NYLJ, Oct 28, 2022 at 75, col 4 [Sur Ct, Westchester County 2022]).

While there are no express statutory criteria to guide a court in its determination of what constitutes best interests, as noted in Matter of Robert C.B., "[i]t is the official policy of the State of New York to facilitate the 'independence, inclusion, individuality and productivity" of persons with intellectual and developmental disabilities (Matter of Robert C.B., at 709 [citing MHL § 13.01]); see also Matter of Dameris L., 38 Misc 3d 570, 577 [Sur Ct, NY County, 2012] [quoting MHL § 81.01]).¹ "At the core of the inquiry [of what is in the best interest of the person with a developmental or intellectual disability] is striking a balance between providing for the respondent's needs and ensuring that any resulting deprivation of respondent's liberty be by the 'least restrictive means' available to protect both the individual and the community" (Matter of Maria M., NYLJ, Jan. 22, 2026 at 17 col. 3 [Sur Ct, Suffolk County]).

In Matter of Capurso (63 Misc 3d 725), this court terminated an SCPA article 17-A guardianship where the record before the court demonstrated that the person with a developmental disability had gained greater independence, had secured and sustained employment, managed a bank account, maintained a social life, traveled independently and engaged with a supported decision-making network (see Capurso, 63 Misc 3d at 729-730).

The record before this court demonstrates that Robert has gained greater autonomy, he has lived independently since 2016 and presently lives with his partner and their son, and is gainfully employed and pursuing further opportunities in his career. He manages his and his household finances, travels independently, and cares for his son. As he testified, Robert pays due attention to the control and maintenance of his disability and his goals of using support resources available to him including the execution of a health care proxy and power of attorney. In addition to the testimony provided in the record, it is clear that Robert's parents are still a supportive and present influence in his life. Therefore, Robert has a system of supported decision making in place, which will be strengthened with the execution of a health care proxy and power of attorney, all of which constitutes a less restrictive alternative to an SCPA article 17-A guardianship. The court finds that the guardianship is no longer warranted.

Based on the above, the petition is granted and the decree dated January 24, 2011, as modified by decision and order dated November 22, 2022, is vacated; the SCPA article 17-A guardianship of Robert's person and property is terminated; the letters of guardianship issued to Thomas and Diane are hereby revoked; and Robert's full legal capacity is restored.

Robert should now proceed to put the health care proxy and the power of attorney in place.

Diane and Thomas are directed to account formally or informally for their proceedings as guardians of Robert's property in an expeditious manner.

This is the decision and order of the court.

The papers considered are as follows:

1. Petition, filed on March 19, 2026;

2. Affidavit of Robert R., dated March 7, 2026;

3. Affirmation of Joel Krooks, Esq., March 13, 2026;

4. Waivers, consents, and renunciations, filed on March 19, 2026;

5. Citation returnable on June 17, 2026; and

6. Affidavit of service of the citation, filed on May 1, 2026.

Dated: July 31, 2026

White Plains, New York

HON. BRANDON R. SALL

Westchester County Surrogate

FOOTNOTES

1.   Mental Hygiene Law § 81.01 provides in relevant part: The legislature finds that it is desirable for and beneficial to persons with incapacities to make available to them the least restrictive form of intervention which assists them in meeting their needs but, at the same time, permits them to exercise the independence and self-determination of which they are capable.

Brandon R. Sall, S.