DECISION ORDER
ORDERED that the order is affirmed, with costs.
Contrary to the appellant's contention, the Surrogate has the authority to require, on his own motion, a fiduciary to file an accounting in the best interests of the estate ( see, SCPA 2205; Matter of Stark, 233 A.D.2d 449). Here, the evidence demonstrated that the appellant, as the son of the decedent and an attorney-at-law, wielded a significant amount of influence over the decedent. This control was further exacerbated by the durable power of attorney granted by the decedent to the appellant. Thus, a fiduciary relationship existed and the Surrogate properly required the appellant to file an accounting in the best interests of the estate ( see, Matter of Stark, supra, at 450).
The appellant's remaining contentions are without merit.
MANGANO, P.J., ALTMAN, SCHMIDT, and SMITH, JJ., concur.