Legal Opinion
In re the Estate of MacDonald
New York Court of Appeals
Decided December 16, 1976PublishedCited by 12 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Memorandum. Although the hearsay testimony of the attorney-draftsman would, under usual circumstances, be inadmissible (see Matter of Kennedy, 167 NY 163; Matter of Staiger, 243 NY 468, 472) the same might be received in the absence of objection (Matter of Findlay, 253 NY 1, 11). The Surrogate considered this testimony in his finding that the proof offered was insufficient to rebut the presumption of intentional revocation. Since this finding of fact was affirmed by the Appellate Division, it is beyond the scope of our review.
Chief Judge Breitel and Judges Jasen, Gabrielli, Jones, Wachtler,…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- In Re the Estate of FindlayNew York Court of Appeals · 1930
- In Re Proving the Last Will & Testament of KennedyNew York Court of Appeals · 1901
- In Re the Probate of the Will of StaigerNew York Court of Appeals · 1926
3Cited by12 opinions
- In re the Estate of RiefbergNew York Court of Appeals · 1983
- Kellogg v. KelloggAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2002
- SIEMUCHA, PAUL v. GARRISON, ROBERT D.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2013
- State v. KandaHawaii Supreme Court · 1980
- Terrell v. StateDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1983
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.