In re the Probate of the Will of Schulman

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re the Probate of the Will of Schulman

31 A.D.2d 985, 297 N.Y.S.2d 848, 1969 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4466

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

DecidedMarch 10, 1969

StatusPublished

This text of 31 A.D.2d 985 (In re the Probate of the Will of Schulman) 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 Schulman, 31 A.D.2d 985, 297 N.Y.S.2d 848, 1969 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4466 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1969).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam.

Appeal from an order of the Surrogate’s Court of Ulster County which, among other things, (1) denied objeetant’s application for a stay of this proceeding for the probate of decedent’s purported will, pending the determination of an action brought in the Supreme Court to set aside a conveyance by decedent of certain realty and (2) directed that the parties be prepared to proceed to trial of the probate proceeding on September 17, 1968. We perceive no reason to disturb the exercise of the Surrogate’s Court’s discretion in denying the stay requested. Matter of Mann (24 A D 2d 780) and Matter of Tebin (7 A D 2d 720), upon which appellant relies, are clearly inapposite, as appears from the memorandum decisions therein. The order, however, should have provided for the framing of issues, in advance of. the jury trial demanded. (SCPA 502, subd. 4.) Order modified, on the law, so as to provide that the issues be framed by the Surrogate’s Court in accordance with objectant’s proposal thereof, heretofore filed, or otherwise- as may be proper, and a new trial date fixed, and matter remitted to the Surrogate’s Court for further proceedings not inconsistent herewith; and, as so modified, affirmed, without costs. Gibson, P. J., Reynolds, Aulisi, Staley, Jr., and Cooke, JJ., concur in memorandum Per Curiam.

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

Per Curiam.

Appeal from an order of the Surrogate’s Court of Ulster County which, among other things, (1) denied objeetant’s application for a stay of this proceeding for the probate of decedent’s purported will, pending the determination of an action brought in the Supreme Court to set aside a conveyance by decedent of certain realty and (2) directed that the parties be prepared to proceed to trial of the probate proceeding on September 17, 1968. We perceive no reason to disturb the exercise of the Surrogate’s Court’s discretion in denying the stay requested. Matter of Mann (24 A D 2d 780) and Matter of Tebin (7 A D 2d 720), upon which appellant relies, are clearly inapposite, as appears from the memorandum decisions therein. The order, however, should have provided for the framing of issues, in advance of. the jury trial demanded. (SCPA 502, subd. 4.) Order modified, on the law, so as to provide that the issues be framed by the Surrogate’s Court in accordance with objectant’s proposal thereof, heretofore filed, or otherwise- as may be proper, and a new trial date fixed, and matter remitted to the Surrogate’s Court for further proceedings not inconsistent herewith; and, as so modified, affirmed, without costs. Gibson, P. J., Reynolds, Aulisi, Staley, Jr., and Cooke, JJ., concur in memorandum Per Curiam.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

31 A.D.2d 985, 297 N.Y.S.2d 848, 1969 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4466, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-the-probate-of-the-will-of-schulman-nyappdiv-1969.