A client once came into my office intending to name her three adult children as co-executors of her will. It seemed like the fairest path, a way to prevent any one of them from feeling slighted or left out of the process. I understood her reasoning completely. In her mind, it was a gesture of equality and trust.
But in my experience, what feels fair on paper can create deep conflict in reality. Forcing three people—even loving siblings—into a mandatory business partnership during a time of grief is a significant risk. The administration of an estate is not a symbolic honor; it is a job with serious fiduciary duties, deadlines, and potential liabilities. While you absolutely can name more than one executor in New York, the more important question is whether you should.
The Theory vs. The Reality of Co-Executors
The idea of appointing co-executors often comes from a good place. A parent might want to balance the skills of their children—one is an accountant, the other a real estate agent. Or perhaps they simply don’t want to choose, believing a shared responsibility will foster cooperation. The theory is that two heads are better than one, providing a system of checks and balances over the estate’s assets.
The reality is far more complicated. In New York, co-executors are generally required to act jointly. This means no single executor can unilaterally decide to sell a property, close a bank account, or pay a creditor. Imagine an estate with a brokerage account. To liquidate a stock position, the financial institution will require signatures from all executors. If one lives in Brooklyn, another in Florida, and the third is traveling in Europe, a simple transaction can become a logistical nightmare of overnighting documents and coordinating schedules.
When disagreements arise, the result is often paralysis. If executors cannot reach a consensus on a critical decision—like whether to sell the family home or what price to accept—the estate administration can grind to a halt. This is more than an inconvenience; it can cause financial harm to the estate and its beneficiaries.
When Disagreements Lead to Surrogate’s Court
When co-executors are at an impasse, they have no simple tie-breaker. Their recourse is to petition the Surrogate’s Court for guidance or intervention. This turns a private family matter into a public and costly legal proceeding. Under the New York Surrogate’s Court Procedure Act (SCPA), the court can be asked to weigh in on disputes between fiduciaries.
For example, SCPA § 2102 allows a fiduciary to petition the court for direction on a particular matter. While this provides a path forward, it’s a path that consumes time and estate assets, as legal fees for all sides can be paid from the estate itself. The process erodes not only the value of the inheritance but also the family relationships the testator was trying to preserve.
I have seen cases where sibling co-executors spent more on litigation against each other than the value of the asset they were fighting over. The original intent—fairness—was lost completely, replaced by a protracted and painful legal battle that left a permanent scar on the family.
A More Prudent Path to Stewardship
This does not mean you should never name co-executors. It can work, but it requires intentional planning and a realistic assessment of the personalities involved. If you are considering it, have a frank conversation about how your chosen executors handle conflict, communication, and responsibility.
However, there are often better structures to achieve the same goals. Here are a few approaches we consider with our clients:
- Name a Primary and a Successor: The simplest and often cleanest approach is to name one person as the primary executor and then name one or two others as successors. This establishes a clear line of authority. The primary executor has the sole power to act, and the successor is on deck to step in only if the primary is unable or unwilling to serve. This honors multiple people without creating a forced committee.
- Delegate, Don’t Appoint: Your will can name a single executor but include language that encourages them to consult with their siblings or other trusted advisors. This provides for collaboration without creating a legal requirement for unanimity. The ultimate decision-making authority rests with one person, avoiding deadlock.
- Consider a Corporate Fiduciary: For larger or more complex estates, or where family dynamics are already strained, appointing a professional or corporate fiduciary (often a bank or trust company) can be the wisest choice. They bring impartiality, expertise, and efficiency to the role. A family member can be named as a co-fiduciary or advisor, giving them a role in oversight without bogging them down in the day-to-day administration.
Stewardship.
The goal of your estate plan is to ensure your legacy is passed on smoothly and preserves the family harmony you’ve built over a lifetime. The structure of your plan, especially the choice of who will be in charge, is critical to that outcome.
The choice of an executor is not a gesture; it is a critical business decision. Before you make that decision in your will, we can map out the practical consequences of each option. Schedule a consultation to review the fiduciary structure of your plan and align it with your family’s reality.
