Legal Opinion

Crossman v. . Crossman

New York Court of Appeals

Decided February 26, 1884PublishedCited by 59 opinions

Appeal from judgment of the General Term of the Supreme Court in the second judicial department entered upon an order made September 11,1883, which affirmed a decree of the surrogate of the county of Kings denying an application to revoke the probate of the will of Henry Crossman, deceased. (Reported below, 30 Hun, 385.) The facts so far as material are stated in the opinion. When a will is executed in duplicate it is necessary to present both duplicates for probate.

Read the full summary

1Opinion of the CourtEarl, J.

Henry Grossman, the testator, died in January, 1881, leaving a will executed in duplicate. The duplicates were executed at the same time, with the same subscribing witnesses, and contained the same provisions, and the same language. One of the duplicates was produced before the surrogate, and was duly proved and admitted to probate, January 28, 1881. Within a year thereafter several of the heirs and next of kin of the testator filed allegations against the validity of the will, the competency of its proof and the mental capacity of the testator, under the provisions of the Code of Civil…

2Cases cited2 opinions

Bailey v. TaylorSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1836
In re the Probate of Two Papers Propounded as the Last Will & Testament of FormanNew York Supreme Court · 1869

3Cited by59 opinions

In Re Proving the Last Will & Testament of ConwayNew York Court of Appeals · 1891
Roche v. . NasonNew York Court of Appeals · 1906
In Re the Will of WallSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1943
In Re Estate of HolmbergIllinois Supreme Court · 1948
City Nat. Bank v. SlocumCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1921

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