In re the Estate of Boyle

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re the Estate of Boyle

107 A.D.2d 807

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

DecidedJanuary 28, 1985

StatusPublished

Cited by4 cases

This text of 107 A.D.2d 807 (In re the Estate of Boyle) 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 the Estate of Boyle, 107 A.D.2d 807 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1985).

Pincite

Opinion

— In a proceeding pursuant to the Surrogate’s Court Act to vacate the decree admitting to probate the last will and testament of the decedent, James E. Boyle, on the ground that the waiver of citation had been signed by mistake, petitioner James P. Boyle appeals from an order of the Surrogate’s Court, Dutchess County (Benson, S.), dated April 27, 1984, which, after a hearing, dismissed the proceeding.

Order affirmed, with costs payable personally by the appellant.

[808]*808The evidence at the hearing established that petitioner read the waiver of citation on probate before signing it, and therefore is chargeable with knowledge of its contents and effect. Since neither mistake nor fraud was established, the Surrogate did not err in refusing to vacate the probate decree. Thompson, J. P., Bracken, Brown and Rubin, JJ., concur.

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

— In a proceeding pursuant to the Surrogate’s Court Act to vacate the decree admitting to probate the last will and testament of the decedent, James E. Boyle, on the ground that the waiver of citation had been signed by mistake, petitioner James P. Boyle appeals from an order of the Surrogate’s Court, Dutchess County (Benson, S.), dated April 27, 1984, which, after a hearing, dismissed the proceeding.

Order affirmed, with costs payable personally by the appellant.

[808]*808The evidence at the hearing established that petitioner read the waiver of citation on probate before signing it, and therefore is chargeable with knowledge of its contents and effect. Since neither mistake nor fraud was established, the Surrogate did not err in refusing to vacate the probate decree. Thompson, J. P., Bracken, Brown and Rubin, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

107 A.D.2d 807, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-the-estate-of-boyle-nyappdiv-1985.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack