In re Probate of the Will of Fogarty

275 A.D.2d 1057

Opinion

Although the verdict was properly directed upon the issues as to which appellants have the burden of proof, other issues, upon which the burden was imposed upon respondent Brennan, depended for their determination upon the testimony of the subscribing witnesses to the will. The testimony of these witnesses was positive and not directly contradicted. They were, nevertheless, interested in the probate of the will to such extent as to require their credibility to be submitted to the jury. (Matter of Kindberg, 207 N. Y. 220; Van Gaasbeek v. Staples, 85 App. Div. 271, affd. 177 N. Y. 524; Matter of Perkett, 192 App. Div. 846.) Although the direction of a verdict was erroneous only as to such issues, all of the issues must be retried. (Matter of Gallo, 252 App. Div. 861; Matter of Lawler, 257 App. Div. 1098.) Nolan, P. J., Carswell, Adel, Sneed and MacCrate, JJ., concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

In re Probate of the Will of Fogarty, 275 A.D.2d 1057 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1949).

275 A.D.2d 1057 (In re Probate of the Will of Fogarty) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

In Re the Probate of the Will of Kindberg
100 N.E. 789 (New York Court of Appeals, 1912)
Van Gaasbeek v. . Staples
69 N.E. 1132 (New York Court of Appeals, 1903)
Van Gaasbeek v. Staples
85 A.D. 271 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1903)
In re the Probate of the Will of Perkett
192 A.D. 846 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1920)
In re Proving the Last Will & Testament of Gallo
252 A.D. 861 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1937)
In re Probate of the Last Will & Testament of Lawler
257 A.D. 1098 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1939)