Vandemark v. Vandemark
New York Supreme Court
THIS was an appeal from an order of the surrogate of Ulster county, admitting to prohate the last will and testament of William Vandemark, deceased. The will hears date the eleventh day of June, 1851, and was executed in due form of law.
Read the full summary
THIS was an appeal from an order of the surrogate of Ulster county, admitting to prohate the last will and testament of William Vandemark, deceased. The will hears date the eleventh day of June, 1851, and was executed in due form of law. By the will, the testator devised to his son, James Vandemark, the appellant, a part of a farm called the Embree place, worth, as appears from the testimony in the case, about $2000, and charged it with the payment of $100 each to his two daughters, Maria and Bebecca. Some two years after the will was executed, the testator sold and conveyed the whole of the…
1Opinion of the Court
By the Court, Harris, J.
The appellant, James Vandemark, presented the will to the surrogate, and was a petitioner for its probate. It is insisted that he cannot appeal from the order made upon his own application. But this objection is untenable. The statute provides that, after any will has been proved before the surrogate, any devisee or legatee named therein, or any heir or-next of kin to the testator, may, within three months thereafter, appeal from the decision. (2 R. S. 66, § 55.) This provision is, of course, sufficiev 'vy broad to authorize this appeal, even though the mt was a…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Adams v. WinneNew York Court of Chancery · 1838
- Beck v. McGillisNew York Supreme Court · 1850
3Cited by11 opinions
- McNaughton v. . McNaughtonNew York Court of Appeals · 1866
- Hoitt v. HoittSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1885
- In re the Estate of CrounseNew York Surrogate's Court · 1938
- In re the estate of DowdNew York Surrogate's Court · 1879
- McNaughton v. McNaughtonNew York Supreme Court · 1864
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.