In re the Estate of Iodice
This text of 228 A.D.2d 680 (In re the Estate of Iodice) 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.
Opinion
Contrary to the objectants’ contention, there was no evidence of undue influence exercised by the testator’s wife over the testator (see, Children’s Aid Socy. v Loveridge, 70 NY 387, [681]*681394; Matter of Kumstar, 66 NY2d 691, rearg denied 67 NY2d 647; Matter of Walther, 6 NY2d 49; Matter of Bianco, 195 AD2d 457, 458). As a result, the court properly set aside the verdict and directed that the will be admitted to probate (see, CPLR 4404 [a]; Micallef v Miehle Co., 39 NY2d 376, 380-381; Nicastro v Park, 113 AD2d 129, 131-132). Sullivan, J. P., Joy, Krausman and McGinity, JJ., concur.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
228 A.D.2d 680, 644 N.Y.2d 992, 644 N.Y.S.2d 992, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7432, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-the-estate-of-iodice-nyappdiv-1996.