Cornwell v. Wooley
New York Court of Appeals
Charles Cornwell sued Mathilda D. Wooley, surviving executrix of Isaac M. Wooley, in the supreme court, to recover a legacy given by the will to Joel Parker, and by Parker assigned to plaintiff. The defense was that the will was drawn and witnessed by Parker, and proved by his testimony; and that the legacy was therefore void under the statute.
Read the full summary
Charles Cornwell sued Mathilda D. Wooley, surviving executrix of Isaac M. Wooley, in the supreme court, to recover a legacy given by the will to Joel Parker, and by Parker assigned to plaintiff. The defense was that the will was drawn and witnessed by Parker, and proved by his testimony; and that the legacy was therefore void under the statute. On the trial it appeared that the plaintiff’s assignor, Joel Parker, was one of the witnesses to the will, and resided out of the State at the time it was proved. There was one other subscribing witness. On the examination before the surrogate of such…
1Opinion of the CourtHunt, J.
The statute upon this subject is as follows: “If any person shall be a subscribing witness to the execution of any will, when in any beneficial devise, legacy, interest, or appointment of any real or personal estate, shall be made to such witness, and such will cannot be proved without the testimony of such witness, the said devise, &e., shall be void, so far only *443as concerns such witness, or any claiming under him; and such person shall be a competent witness, and compellable to testify respecting the execution of the said will, in like manner as if no such devise or bequest had been made.”…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Jackson, ex dem. Kellogg v. VickoryNew York Supreme Court · 1828
3Cited by3 opinions
- In re BeckAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1896
- In re the Judicial Settlement of the Accounts of OwenAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1900
- In re the Accounting of OwenNew York Surrogate's Court · 1899