In re Wolf

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re Wolf

260 A.D. 1033, 24 N.Y.S.2d 722, 1940 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5950

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

DecidedDecember 16, 1940

StatusPublished

This text of 260 A.D. 1033 (In re Wolf) 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 Wolf, 260 A.D. 1033, 24 N.Y.S.2d 722, 1940 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5950 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1940).

Pincite

Opinion

Decree of the Surrogate’s Court of Kings County, denying probate to a script executed by the decedent on May 22, 1939, on the ground that the testator did not possess testamentary capacity, in so far as appealed from, reversed on the law and the facts and a new trial granted, with costs to appellants to abide the event. An examination of the testimony relating to the issue of testamentary capacity discloses that a finding of want of such capacity is against the overwhelming weight of evidence. Of all the witnesses who testified for the contestants only two assumed to brand the decedent as having been guilty of conduct that was irrational. One of them who gave such an opinion furnished no evidentiary basis for it. The other one furnished a semblance of a basis for the opinion that the decedent had been irrational, and his testimony barely makes a jury question on the issue. Lazansky, P. J., Hagarty, Carswell, Adel and Close, JJ., concur.

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

Decree of the Surrogate’s Court of Kings County, denying probate to a script executed by the decedent on May 22, 1939, on the ground that the testator did not possess testamentary capacity, in so far as appealed from, reversed on the law and the facts and a new trial granted, with costs to appellants to abide the event. An examination of the testimony relating to the issue of testamentary capacity discloses that a finding of want of such capacity is against the overwhelming weight of evidence. Of all the witnesses who testified for the contestants only two assumed to brand the decedent as having been guilty of conduct that was irrational. One of them who gave such an opinion furnished no evidentiary basis for it. The other one furnished a semblance of a basis for the opinion that the decedent had been irrational, and his testimony barely makes a jury question on the issue. Lazansky, P. J., Hagarty, Carswell, Adel and Close, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

260 A.D. 1033, 24 N.Y.S.2d 722, 1940 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5950, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-wolf-nyappdiv-1940.