The Paul Szypula power of attorney lawsuit is a New York dispute in which Michael Szypula sued his brother Paul in Putnam County Supreme Court over Paul’s use of a power of attorney granted by their father. Michael asked the court to revoke the power of attorney, order Paul to account for his financial dealings on their father’s behalf, and award attorneys’ fees. In May 2026, the Appellate Division, Second Department, affirmed the trial court’s refusal to award those fees.1NY Courts. Matter of Szypula v Szypula, 2026 NY Slip Op 03171
What Michael Szypula Asked the Court to Do
Michael brought the proceeding under New York General Obligations Law § 5-1510. That statute lets a court revoke a power of attorney and compel the agent to produce a detailed accounting of every receipt, disbursement, and transaction made for the principal. The principal here was the brothers’ father, who had named Paul as his agent.1NY Courts. Matter of Szypula v Szypula, 2026 NY Slip Op 03171
The case was filed in Putnam County Supreme Court under Index No. 500633/22. Michael was represented by Neufeld, O’Leary & Giusto, with Vasilios Christos Tzanides serving as counsel.2FindLaw. In re Michael Szypula Michael moved for summary judgment on his petition, seeking revocation of the power of attorney, a full accounting from Paul, and reasonable attorneys’ fees.
How the Courts Ruled
On July 26, 2024, Judge Victor G. Grossman denied the portion of Michael’s motion that asked for attorneys’ fees.3NY Courts. Matter of Szypula v Szypula, Appellate Division Decision The appellate record does not reveal how the court ruled on the other parts of the motion, including whether the power of attorney was actually revoked or whether Paul was ordered to produce an accounting.1NY Courts. Matter of Szypula v Szypula, 2026 NY Slip Op 03171
Michael appealed the fee denial. On May 20, 2026, the Appellate Division, Second Department, affirmed. The panel applied New York’s “American Rule”: attorneys’ fees are an incident of litigation and cannot be recovered unless a specific statute or contract provision authorizes an award. The court noted that General Obligations Law § 5-1504(4)(b) does authorize fees in power of attorney proceedings in certain narrow circumstances, but Michael had not identified any statutory provision or contract term that applied to his case.1NY Courts. Matter of Szypula v Szypula, 2026 NY Slip Op 03171
The appeal was limited to the fees issue. The Appellate Division did not rule on Paul’s conduct as his father’s agent or on the revocation and accounting requests.
A Separate Real Property Case Between the Brothers
Michael also filed a separate lawsuit against Paul in the same court on August 10, 2022, under Index No. 500886-2022. That case was categorized as a tortious interference claim involving real estate in Putnam County, with Michael seeking a preliminary injunction and a temporary restraining order to stop Paul from blocking access by an appraiser and other inspectors to properties Michael was trying to purchase.4Trellis Law. Affirmation in Support, Szypula v Szypula5Trellis Law. Memorandum of Law in Support, Szypula v Szypula Both matters were assigned to Judge Grossman, and the real property case remained listed as active in the most recent available records. It is a separate proceeding from the power of attorney case and was not part of the 2026 appeal.
What the Ruling Means for Fee Requests in POA Cases
The decision is a straightforward application of the American Rule to proceedings under General Obligations Law § 5-1510. If you file a petition to revoke a power of attorney or force an agent to account, recovering your legal fees is not automatic. You have to point to a specific statutory provision that fits your facts, or to a contract term that shifts fees. Section 5-1504(4)(b) permits fee awards in some power of attorney proceedings, but the Second Department treated those situations as narrow and declined to read a general fee entitlement into § 5-1510 cases.