Washington, Feb 22 (NationPress) A legal confrontation over a $330 million estate has escalated into a significant debate about the functionality of a New York court system.

Brandon Bishunauth, 23, is contesting the administration of his late father’s estate in Queens Surrogate’s Court. His father, Mohammad Malik, a real estate magnate, passed away in February 2023.

Court documents indicate that the estate's assessed value stands at $330 million.

An investigative article released in January 2025 scrutinized the situation, highlighting concerns about political influence within the judicial framework of Queens. It noted that the law firm Sweeney, Reich & Bolz has historically been involved in the selection of judges in the area.

The report pointed out that the local Democratic Party in Queens does not utilize an independent screening panel. Instead, it is suggested that partners from this law firm constitute two-thirds of a party panel responsible for evaluating judicial candidates.

Bishunauth’s appellate documents accuse Surrogate Judge Peter J. Kelly of “Repeated, Purposeful and Knowing” legal violations. The documents claim that Judge Kelly utilized a “Secret Court Docket” in place of the state's electronic filing system, NYSCEF.

These allegations assert that this action obstructed a cross-motion submitted on January 24, 2024, preventing it from being filed and considered. The filings argue that this hindered “As-of-Right Appeals” and infringed upon due process.

According to Malik's 2023 will, Bishunauth was allocated $25,000, while the majority of the estate was designated for his sister, Yasmin Malik.

Under New York law, should the wills be declared invalid, the estate may revert to the son.

Bishunauth contends that a December 5, 2023, proceeding resulted only in what he terms an “agreement to agree.” He asserts that essential conditions were unmet before a decree for probate was granted.

Joint affidavits submitted by his mother, aunt, and uncle claim the judge imposed what they refer to as “Judicial Lifetime Gag Orders” on non-parties present during court proceedings, which were enacted before any final written settlement was formalized.

The appellate documents further allege that motions were denied docketing despite their submission, which they argue obstructed appropriate appellate oversight.

The case is currently under review by the Appellate Division, Second Department, which must determine whether the decree and sealing order remain intact and if any procedural breaches occurred.

Surrogate’s Courts in New York are responsible for managing wills and estate challenges, and the Queens Surrogate’s Court has previously faced scrutiny over its connections to local political entities.

This ongoing case has rekindled those apprehensions.