In re the Estate of Weinstock
New York Surrogate's Court
1Opinion of the CourtJohn D. Bennett, J.
While the objections in this nonjury probate contest raise the standard issues of due execution, testamentary capacity, fraud and undue influence, the primary emphasis has been directed to fraud and undue influence and, more particularly, as .they relate to that portion of the ¡will which names the two attorney-draftsmen executors of the will. The third named executor, a layman friend of1 the decedent, has renounced his appointment. ;
The evidence adduced establishes that the will of July 23, 1970 was properly executed and that at the time of its execution the decedent possessed testamentary…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- In Re the Will of PutnamNew York Court of Appeals · 1931
- Coffin v. . CoffinNew York Court of Appeals · 1861
- Wood v. . AmoryNew York Court of Appeals · 1887
- Compher v. BrowningIllinois Supreme Court · 1906
- In Re Estate of RosenbergOregon Supreme Court · 1952
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- In re the Estate of EckertNew York Surrogate's Court · 1978
- In re the Estate LawsonAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1980
- In re the Estate of SheehanNew York Surrogate's Court · 1975
- In re the Estate of WhartonNew York Surrogate's Court · 1982
- In re the Estate of AtlasNew York Surrogate's Court · 1979