In re the Estate of Jacobs

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re the Estate of Jacobs

251 A.D.2d 581, 673 N.Y.S.2d 934, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7510

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

DecidedJune 22, 1998

StatusPublished

This text of 251 A.D.2d 581 (In re the Estate of Jacobs) 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 Jacobs, 251 A.D.2d 581, 673 N.Y.S.2d 934, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7510 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1998).

Pincite

Opinion

—In a contested probate proceeding, Ingrid Andersson Jacobs appeals from an order of the Surrogate’s Court, Westchester County (Emanuelli, S.), dated May 27, 1997, which denied her motion for summary judgment dismissing all objections to the probate of the will of Bernard Jacobs dated August 11, 1990.

Ordered the the order is affirmed, with costs payable by the estate.

The Surrogate’s Court properly denied the motion for summary judgment dismissing the objections to probate of the decedent’s will which alleged, inter alia, lack of testamentary capacity, undue influence, and fraud. The objectants’ evidence, if accepted as true (see, Murphy v Herfort, 140 AD2d 415, 416; Weiss v Garfield, 21 AD2d 156), demonstrated that issues of fact existed with respect to the decedent’s testamentary capacity, and whether the decedent’s second wife exercised undue influence over the decedent or made false statements which caused the decedent to dispose of his property in a manner different than he otherwise would have (see, CPLR 3212 [b]; Matter of Kumstar, 66 NY2d 691; Matter of Walther, 6 NY2d 49, 53; Matter of Bianco, 195 AD2d 457, 458). Rosenblatt, J. P., Miller, Ritter and Goldstein, JJ., concur.

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

—In a contested probate proceeding, Ingrid Andersson Jacobs appeals from an order of the Surrogate’s Court, Westchester County (Emanuelli, S.), dated May 27, 1997, which denied her motion for summary judgment dismissing all objections to the probate of the will of Bernard Jacobs dated August 11, 1990.

Ordered the the order is affirmed, with costs payable by the estate.

The Surrogate’s Court properly denied the motion for summary judgment dismissing the objections to probate of the decedent’s will which alleged, inter alia, lack of testamentary capacity, undue influence, and fraud. The objectants’ evidence, if accepted as true (see, Murphy v Herfort, 140 AD2d 415, 416; Weiss v Garfield, 21 AD2d 156), demonstrated that issues of fact existed with respect to the decedent’s testamentary capacity, and whether the decedent’s second wife exercised undue influence over the decedent or made false statements which caused the decedent to dispose of his property in a manner different than he otherwise would have (see, CPLR 3212 [b]; Matter of Kumstar, 66 NY2d 691; Matter of Walther, 6 NY2d 49, 53; Matter of Bianco, 195 AD2d 457, 458). Rosenblatt, J. P., Miller, Ritter and Goldstein, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

251 A.D.2d 581, 673 N.Y.S.2d 934, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7510, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-the-estate-of-jacobs-nyappdiv-1998.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack