In re the Estate of Gerard

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re the Estate of Gerard

23 A.D.2d 666, 257 N.Y.S.2d 1013, 1965 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4724

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

DecidedMarch 8, 1965

StatusPublished

This text of 23 A.D.2d 666 (In re the Estate of Gerard) 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 Gerard, 23 A.D.2d 666, 257 N.Y.S.2d 1013, 1965 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4724 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1965).

Pincite

Opinion

In a proceeding to probate a certain written instrument, dated March 18, 1962, as the last will and testament of Grace W. Gerard, deceased, the proponents appeal from a decree of the Surrogate's iCourt, Suffolk ‘County, entered June 2, 1964 after trial, upon a jury’s verdict on framed issues, which denied probate to the propounded instrument, and, upon the Surrogate’s subsequent decision, awarded: (a) costs to the contestants personally against the proponent Irala Jlackson; and (i>) $7,500 as compensation to the special guardian. Decree affirmed, with costs to the respondents filing separate briefs, payable out of the estate. No opinion. We have not passed upon the question of proponents’ right to a counsel fee, costs and disbursements, since no provision with respect thereto is included in the decree appealed from. However, were that provision in the decree and before us we would not interfere with the discretion [667]*667exercised by the Surrogate, as indicated by his decision. Beldoek, P. J., Brennan, Hill, Babin and Hopkins, JJ., concur.

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

In a proceeding to probate a certain written instrument, dated March 18, 1962, as the last will and testament of Grace W. Gerard, deceased, the proponents appeal from a decree of the Surrogate's iCourt, Suffolk ‘County, entered June 2, 1964 after trial, upon a jury’s verdict on framed issues, which denied probate to the propounded instrument, and, upon the Surrogate’s subsequent decision, awarded: (a) costs to the contestants personally against the proponent Irala Jlackson; and (i>) $7,500 as compensation to the special guardian. Decree affirmed, with costs to the respondents filing separate briefs, payable out of the estate. No opinion. We have not passed upon the question of proponents’ right to a counsel fee, costs and disbursements, since no provision with respect thereto is included in the decree appealed from. However, were that provision in the decree and before us we would not interfere with the discretion [667]*667exercised by the Surrogate, as indicated by his decision. Beldoek, P. J., Brennan, Hill, Babin and Hopkins, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

23 A.D.2d 666, 257 N.Y.S.2d 1013, 1965 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4724, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-the-estate-of-gerard-nyappdiv-1965.