In the Matter of the Vincent W. Urbank and Ida M. Graf Urbank Revocable Living Trust, Etc.

── In the Matter of the Vincent W. Urbank and Ida M. Graf Urbank Revocable Living Trust, Etc. ── Court: New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division Date: May 22, 2026 Category: General NOT FOR PUBLICATION WITHOUT THE APPROVAL OF THE APPELLATE DIVISION This opinion shall not "constitute precedent or be binding upon any court ." Although it is posted on the internet, this opinion is binding only on the parties in the case and its use in other cases is limited . R. 1:36-3. SUPERIOR COURT OF NEW JERSEY APPELLATE DIVISION DOCKET NO. A-0520-24 IN THE MATTER OF THE VINCENT W. URBANK and IDA M. GRAF URBANK REVOCABLE LIVING TRUST DATED 07/18/1991. ________________________________ Argued May 6, 2026 – Decided May 22, 2026 Before Judges Gilson and Perez Friscia. On appeal from the Superior Court of New Jersey, Chancery Division, Ocean County, Docket No. 186576. Vincent A. Urbank, appellant, argued the cause on appellant's behalf. Joel A. Davies argued the cause for respondent Trustee of Living Trust 1 (Taff, Davies & Kalwinsky, attorneys; Joel A. Davies, of counsel and on the brief). PER CURIAM Appellant Vincent A. Urbank, self-represented, appeals from the October 8, 2024 Probate Part order denying reconsideration of the June 28, 2024 order, which approved Joel Davies, Esq.'s accountings as a successor trustee for the Vincent W. Urbank and Ida M. Graf Revocable Living Trust (RVT) and awarded $9,039.77 in commissions.1 Following our review of the record, parties' arguments, and applicable law, we affirm. I. This matter returns to us for a third time. The first appeal resulted in a remand for the probate court to require the court-appointed RVT trustees and administrators to "fully account for estate and [RVT] assets formerly in their hands." In re Vincent W. Urbank and Ida M. Graf Revocable Living Tr. (In re Urbank I), No. A-2022-19 (App. Div. July 7, 2022) (slip op. at 3). Specifically, we remanded for the court "to ensure that each of the three successive trustees . . . appointed in this case either file[d] an accounting, produce[d] a previously filed accounting either approved by the court or the beneficiaries [,] or otherwise explain[ed] on the record why it was impossible to comply with the order(s) that they account." Id. at 15. Thereafter, on the second appeal, we affirmed the second court's approval of the second successor trustee, Jerome Landers, Esq.'s, accounting for the RVT and bond payment award of $2,805. In 1 Similar to the prior appeal, we recognize Urbank has filed this appeal before the court concluded its review of Davies' accountings pursuant to our remand instructions. We note that "[g]enerally, an order is considered final if it disposes of all issues as to all parties." Silviera-Francisco v. Bd. of Educ. of Elizabeth, 224 N.J. 126, 136 (2016). A-0520-24 2 re Vincent W. Urbank and Ida M. Graf Revocable Living Tr. (In re Urbank II), No. A-1331-23 (App. Div. Feb. 19, 2025) (slip op. at 1-18). We limit our recitation to the facts relevant to the issues raised in this appeal. Urbank and Elizabeth Fox were the original trustees of the RVT and were succeeded by Peter Van Dyke, Esq. Van Dyke became the first successor trustee after the contingent beneficiaries, Urbank's children, filed a lawsuit seeking distributions from the RVT. In October 2014, Urbank and his children entered into "a comprehensive seventeen-page agreement" (settlement) resolving their existing claims. In re Urbank I, slip op. at 3. The first court accepted the settlement. At the time of the settlement, the assets held in trust were about $1,640,000. Ibid. The settlement p