In Matter of Deans (68 AD3d 767 [2d Dept 2009], lv to appeal denied 14 NY3d 704 [2010]) the court was faced with a deed to real property that was owned by three parties, the decedent Livingston Deans, his father and his future wife. Livingston Deans, his father Byron and Sharon Stephenson had purchased commercial property in Queens as tenants-in-common in 1991. Livingston Deans subsequently married Sharon and died in 2001, survived by Sharon, an adult child and a minor child of a prior marriage. Letters of administration were issued to Sharon and her attorney. Sharon executed a deed in 2003 in which she forged the signature of the adult daughter, purportedly as "all the heirs at law and next of kin of Livingston M. Deans, deceased" (id at 768). She then obtained two loans, secured by mortgages, using a fraudulent document she executed with someone she represented as Byron Deans. The Surrogate revoked her letters of administration and directed she file an accounting. She filed her accounting to which objections were filed. The objectants asked the court to rescind the deed and mortgages as the product of a fraudulent conveyance. The mortgagees appeared and defended the validity of the mortgage. After a trial, the Surrogate voided the deed and mortgages as fraudulent as based upon false pretenses and directed the County Registrar to cancel the registration of the deed and mortgage. The mortgagees appealed. The mortgagee of one mortgage, and the title company insuring the second mortgage, appealed. In companion decisions, the Appellate Division, Second Department, affirmed that part of the holding voiding the transfer the decedent's interest, and the two mortgages insofar as it affected the estate's interest. The Appellate Division reversed that part of the holding that rescinded the purported conveyance of Byron and Sharon's interest in the property (and the mortgages affecting those interests), on the ground that the Surrogate's Court lack of subject matter jurisdiction "to determine that the mortgage should be cancelled in its entirety where living persons owned the remaining interests in the property pursuant to the 1991 deed." (Matter of Deans, 68 AD3d 767, supra, at 768). The Court modified the decree to void the deed and mortgages to the extent of any interest held by the Deans estate (Matter of Deans, 68 AD3d 767, 889 N.Y.S.2d 668.)