In re the Estate of Gambardella

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re the Estate of Gambardella

81 A.D.2d 835, 438 N.Y.S.2d 836, 1981 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11499

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

DecidedMay 4, 1981

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 81 A.D.2d 835 (In re the Estate of Gambardella) 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 Gambardella, 81 A.D.2d 835, 438 N.Y.S.2d 836, 1981 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11499 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1981).

Pincite

Opinion

— In a proceeding, inter alia, to set aside a decree admitting a will to probate, petitioners appeal from so much of an order of the Surrogate’s Court, Westchester County, dated December 18, 1980, as limited the examination of the respondent and the production of records to the issue of whether the petitioners’ waivers and consents to probate were procured by fraud. Order affirmed insofar as appealed from, with $50 costs and disbursements, payable by the petitioners personally. The order appealed from is appealable since it limited the scope of discovery. It is not akin to a trial court ruling on specific questions objected to at an examination before trial (see CPLR 5701, subd [a], par 2, els [iv], [v]; cf. Spatz v Wide World Travel Serv., 70 AD2d 835). The limitation imposed by the Surrogate was proper, as the only evidence relevant to the issue at bar concerns facts relating to the alleged fraudulent procurement from the petitioners of the waivers and consents to probate. Mollen, P. J., Margett, O’Connor and Weinstein, JJ., concur.

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

— In a proceeding, inter alia, to set aside a decree admitting a will to probate, petitioners appeal from so much of an order of the Surrogate’s Court, Westchester County, dated December 18, 1980, as limited the examination of the respondent and the production of records to the issue of whether the petitioners’ waivers and consents to probate were procured by fraud. Order affirmed insofar as appealed from, with $50 costs and disbursements, payable by the petitioners personally. The order appealed from is appealable since it limited the scope of discovery. It is not akin to a trial court ruling on specific questions objected to at an examination before trial (see CPLR 5701, subd [a], par 2, els [iv], [v]; cf. Spatz v Wide World Travel Serv., 70 AD2d 835). The limitation imposed by the Surrogate was proper, as the only evidence relevant to the issue at bar concerns facts relating to the alleged fraudulent procurement from the petitioners of the waivers and consents to probate. Mollen, P. J., Margett, O’Connor and Weinstein, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

81 A.D.2d 835, 438 N.Y.S.2d 836, 1981 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11499, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-the-estate-of-gambardella-nyappdiv-1981.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack