In re Ruby S.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re Ruby S.

305 A.D.2d 690, 759 N.Y.S.2d 885

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

DecidedMay 27, 2003

StatusPublished

This text of 305 A.D.2d 690 (In re Ruby S.) 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 Ruby S., 305 A.D.2d 690, 759 N.Y.S.2d 885 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2003).

Pincite

Opinion

—In a proceeding pursuant to Mental Hygiene Law article 81 for the appointment of a guardian for Ruby S., the appeal is from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Thomas, J.), dated January 16, 2002, as, after a hearing, invalidated the last will and testament of Ruby S.

Ordered that the appeal is dismissed, with costs to the respondent.

As nominated executrix, the appellant is not aggrieved by the order invalidating the last will and testament of Ruby S., and therefore lacks standing to appeal from it (see Isham v New York Assn. for Improving the Condition of the Poor, 177 NY 218 [1904]; Bryant v Thompson, 128 NY 426, 432-434 [1891]). Ritter, J.P., S. Miller, Goldstein and Schmidt, JJ., concur.

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

—In a proceeding pursuant to Mental Hygiene Law article 81 for the appointment of a guardian for Ruby S., the appeal is from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Thomas, J.), dated January 16, 2002, as, after a hearing, invalidated the last will and testament of Ruby S.

Ordered that the appeal is dismissed, with costs to the respondent.

As nominated executrix, the appellant is not aggrieved by the order invalidating the last will and testament of Ruby S., and therefore lacks standing to appeal from it (see Isham v New York Assn. for Improving the Condition of the Poor, 177 NY 218 [1904]; Bryant v Thompson, 128 NY 426, 432-434 [1891]). Ritter, J.P., S. Miller, Goldstein and Schmidt, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

305 A.D.2d 690, 759 N.Y.S.2d 885, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-ruby-s-nyappdiv-2003.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack