In re Proving the Last Will & Testament of Oates

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re Proving the Last Will & Testament of Oates

171 A.D. 679, 157 N.Y.S. 646, 1916 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5329

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

DecidedFebruary 28, 1916

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 171 A.D. 679 (In re Proving the Last Will & Testament of Oates) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

In re Proving the Last Will & Testament of Oates, 171 A.D. 679, 157 N.Y.S. 646, 1916 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5329 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1916).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam:

A subscribing witness to the will, on the trial of the issue of testamentary capacity, gave his opinion that the testatrix was of sound mind. The contestant laid a foundation for impeachment by asking him if, at a given time and place, and in the presence of a specified person, he did not express a contrary opinion; to which inquiry he replied in the negative. The [680]*680contestant then called the specified person to prove that at the time and place named, and in his presence, the subscribing wit- ' ness said that the testatrix was of unsound mind. The learned trial court excluded this evidence. In doing so it committed reversible error. (Patchin v. Astor Mutual Insurance Co., 13 N. Y. 268; Larkin v. Nassau Electric R. R. Co., 205 id. 267; Waterman v. Chicago & Alton R. Co., 82 Wis. 613, 629; Sanderson v. Nashua, 44 N. H. 492, 494; Greenl. Ev. [15th ed.] § 449, p. 596.)

The decree of the Surrogate’s Court of Richmond county should be reversed, and a new trial ordered, costs to abide the event.

Jenks, P. J., Thomas, Stapleton, Mills and Putnam, JJ., concurred.

Decree of the Surrogate’s Court of Richmond county reversed, and new trial ordered, costs.to abide the event.

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

Per Curiam:

A subscribing witness to the will, on the trial of the issue of testamentary capacity, gave his opinion that the testatrix was of sound mind. The contestant laid a foundation for impeachment by asking him if, at a given time and place, and in the presence of a specified person, he did not express a contrary opinion; to which inquiry he replied in the negative. The [680]*680contestant then called the specified person to prove that at the time and place named, and in his presence, the subscribing wit- ' ness said that the testatrix was of unsound mind. The learned trial court excluded this evidence. In doing so it committed reversible error. (Patchin v. Astor Mutual Insurance Co., 13 N. Y. 268; Larkin v. Nassau Electric R. R. Co., 205 id. 267; Waterman v. Chicago & Alton R. Co., 82 Wis. 613, 629; Sanderson v. Nashua, 44 N. H. 492, 494; Greenl. Ev. [15th ed.] § 449, p. 596.)

The decree of the Surrogate’s Court of Richmond county should be reversed, and a new trial ordered, costs to abide the event.

Jenks, P. J., Thomas, Stapleton, Mills and Putnam, JJ., concurred.

Decree of the Surrogate’s Court of Richmond county reversed, and new trial ordered, costs.to abide the event.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

171 A.D. 679, 157 N.Y.S. 646, 1916 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5329, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-proving-the-last-will-testament-of-oates-nyappdiv-1916.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack