Legal Opinion

In re the Estate of McKeogh

New York Surrogate's Court

Decided April 27, 1934PublishedCited by 7 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Wingate, S.

As no evidence respecting the conditions surrounding the testator, his possessions and the objects of his bounty has been adduced, the court is compelled to answer the propounded questions of testamentary interpretation on the will alone, since the allegations of facts in the briefs of the several parties are not competent proof thereof. (Matter of Mehler, 143 Misc. 63, 64; Matter of Morningstar, Id. 620, 624.) It may be stated, however, that were the facts respecting the services of the residuary legatee to the testator in his last illness duly demonstrated, it would not alter the…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. In re the Estate of SmallmanNew York Surrogate's Court · 1931
  2. In re the Judicial Settlement of the Account of Proceedings of Central Hanover Bank & Trust Co.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1934
  3. In re the Estate of LilienthalNew York Surrogate's Court · 1930
  4. In re the Estate of KrugerNew York Surrogate's Court · 1931
  5. In re the Estate of BlakeNew York Surrogate's Court · 1933

3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. Dwight EstateSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1957
  2. Cooper v. JonesAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1981
  3. In re the Estate of TiffanyNew York Surrogate's Court · 1935
  4. Sainer v. Affiliated Dress Manufacturers Inc.New York Supreme Court · 1938
  5. In re the Estate of PavelkaNew York Surrogate's Court · 1935

2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API