In re the Probate of the Will of Schmidt

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re the Probate of the Will of Schmidt

29 A.D.2d 655, 287 N.Y.S.2d 353, 1968 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4927

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

DecidedJanuary 8, 1968

StatusPublished

This text of 29 A.D.2d 655 (In re the Probate of the Will of Schmidt) 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 Probate of the Will of Schmidt, 29 A.D.2d 655, 287 N.Y.S.2d 353, 1968 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4927 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1968).

Pincite

Opinion

In a probate proceeding, the contestants appeal, as limited by their brief, from so much of an order of the Surrogate’s Court, Suffolk County, dated July 25, 1967, as did not include certain matter within the six framed issues for the jury trial directed in the order. Order modified by adding thereto the following as such issues: (a) Did the said Bernard Schmidt know the contents of the paper writing dated January 29, 1963, offered for probate herein; (b) Did the said paper writing dated January 29, 1963 express the testamentary disposition intended by the said Bernard Schmidt. As so modified, order affirmed insofar as appealed from, without costs. The issues thus added are proper (see, Matter of Lewis, 23 A D 2d 716); and the refusal of the Surrogate to include them in the order appealed from was an improvident exercise of discretion. Brennan, Acting P. J., Rabin, Hopkins, Benjamin and Martuscello, JJ., concur.

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

In a probate proceeding, the contestants appeal, as limited by their brief, from so much of an order of the Surrogate’s Court, Suffolk County, dated July 25, 1967, as did not include certain matter within the six framed issues for the jury trial directed in the order. Order modified by adding thereto the following as such issues: (a) Did the said Bernard Schmidt know the contents of the paper writing dated January 29, 1963, offered for probate herein; (b) Did the said paper writing dated January 29, 1963 express the testamentary disposition intended by the said Bernard Schmidt. As so modified, order affirmed insofar as appealed from, without costs. The issues thus added are proper (see, Matter of Lewis, 23 A D 2d 716); and the refusal of the Surrogate to include them in the order appealed from was an improvident exercise of discretion. Brennan, Acting P. J., Rabin, Hopkins, Benjamin and Martuscello, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

29 A.D.2d 655, 287 N.Y.S.2d 353, 1968 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4927, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-the-probate-of-the-will-of-schmidt-nyappdiv-1968.