In re Probate of Matter Which is Alleged to be the Nuncupative Will of Male
New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division
The present controversy arises upon the petition of Job Male,. George W. Fenno and John W. Harrison, for probate of an. alleged nuncupative will of Job Male, deceased, in which they were named as executors. Upon presentation of the petition,, citations were issued to the next of kin and heirs at law, two of whom had theretofore filed caveats against the admission to probate of anything purporting to be a. will of the decedent, named.
Read the full summary
The present controversy arises upon the petition of Job Male,. George W. Fenno and John W. Harrison, for probate of an. alleged nuncupative will of Job Male, deceased, in which they were named as executors. Upon presentation of the petition,, citations were issued to the next of kin and heirs at law, two of whom had theretofore filed caveats against the admission to probate of anything purporting to be a. will of the decedent, named. Depositions have been regularly taken, upon which this matter is brought to hearing.
1Opinion of the Court
The Ordinary.
Job Male died a childless widower, in his residence at Plain-field, where he had lived for several years, on the night of the 29th of January, 1891, aged about eighty-two years. He left an estate which is estimated to be worth more than half a million dollars, of which $60,000 is in personalty and the remainder is in realty.
The matter offered for probate as his nuncupative will, was had a little more than half an hour before his death. Early in the evening his attending physician, Thomas S. Davis, deeming him to be in a critical condition of health, called Dr. George W. Endicott…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- In re the alleged nuncupative will of YarnallSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1833
- Woods v. RidleyMississippi Supreme Court · 1854
- Phœbe v. BoggessSupreme Court of Virginia · 1844
- Smith v. ThurmanTennessee Supreme Court · 1870
- Pennsylvania v. Becomb, Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Westmoreland County1799
3Cited by1 opinion
- Kennedy v. . DouglasSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1909