In re the Estate of Fiumara
New York Court of Appeals
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION OF THE COURT
Memorandum.
The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed, with costs against the appellant.
In the absence of evidence of a substantial nature inconsistent with any inference to the contrary, the Surrogate properly refused to submit the undue influence claim to the jury (see Matter of Walther, 6 NY2d 49). While the circumstantial evidence adduced at trial may have tended to indicate the existence of an opportunity and a motive on the part of the proponent to exercise undue influence, there was no showing that it in fact was ever exercised. Standing alone, the fact…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- In re the Probate of the Will of WaltherNew York Court of Appeals · 1959
- Children's Aid Society v. . LoveridgeNew York Court of Appeals · 1877
3Cited by32 opinions
- In re the Estate of ZirinskyAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2007
- In re the Estate of EastmanAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2009
- In re the Estate of BuchananAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1997
- In re the Estate of HedgesAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1984
- In re the Estate of BushAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1981
27 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.