In re the Estate of Collins

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re the Estate of Collins

101 A.D.2d 694, 476 N.Y.S.2d 30, 1984 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 18245

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

DecidedApril 12, 1984

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 101 A.D.2d 694 (In re the Estate of Collins) 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 Collins, 101 A.D.2d 694, 476 N.Y.S.2d 30, 1984 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 18245 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1984).

Pincite

Opinion

Order unanimously affirmed, without costs. Memorandum: On remittitur from the Court of Appeals (Matter of Collins, 60 NY2d 466), we agree with the Surrogate that there was sufficient evidence to prove due execution of the testatrix’ will. While the order appealed from does not recite explicit findings to this effect, such a conclusion is implicit in the order which denied respondents’ motion to dismiss the petition for probate, made at the conclusion of the hearing to determine due execution. 1 We only note that contrary to the Court of Appeals opinion, the Surrogate has not as yet admitted the will to probate. The order appealed from afforded respondents the opportunity to file objections to the purported will, a determination with which we also agree. (Resubmission of appeals from order of Niagara County Surrogate’s Court, DiFlorio, S. — will probate.) Present — Dillon, P. J., Hancock, Jr., Callahan, Doerr and Moule, JJ.

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

Order unanimously affirmed, without costs. Memorandum: On remittitur from the Court of Appeals (Matter of Collins, 60 NY2d 466), we agree with the Surrogate that there was sufficient evidence to prove due execution of the testatrix’ will. While the order appealed from does not recite explicit findings to this effect, such a conclusion is implicit in the order which denied respondents’ motion to dismiss the petition for probate, made at the conclusion of the hearing to determine due execution. 1 We only note that contrary to the Court of Appeals opinion, the Surrogate has not as yet admitted the will to probate. The order appealed from afforded respondents the opportunity to file objections to the purported will, a determination with which we also agree. (Resubmission of appeals from order of Niagara County Surrogate’s Court, DiFlorio, S. — will probate.) Present — Dillon, P. J., Hancock, Jr., Callahan, Doerr and Moule, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

101 A.D.2d 694, 476 N.Y.S.2d 30, 1984 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 18245, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-the-estate-of-collins-nyappdiv-1984.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack