Legal Opinion

In re the Contested Will of Diefenthaler

New York Surrogate's Court

Decided February 15, 1903PublishedCited by 5 opinions

Proceedings upon the probate of a will.

1Opinion of the Court

Thomas, S.

The paper propounded for probate bears the signatures of the decedent and two subscribing witnesses. One witness testifies that he drafted the instrument in accordance with instructions of the decedent, who subscribed it in his presence and declared it to be his will and requested him to sign as a witness, which he thereupon did. Ho other person was present at that time. The other witness testifies that, a few days after the paper had been signed by the decedent, he met the decedent in the place of business of the first witness; the paper was then talcen from a safe, bearing the…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Hoysradt v. . KingmanNew York Court of Appeals · 1860
  2. In Re to Revoke the Probate of the Will of PhillipsNew York Court of Appeals · 1885
  3. In re the Will of CareyNew York Surrogate's Court · 1895

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. In re a Paper Propounded as the Last Will & Testament of RoeNew York Surrogate's Court · 1913
  2. In re the Probate of the Will of WillenborgNew York Surrogate's Court · 1958
  3. In re the Probate of the Will of EakinsNew York Surrogate's Court · 1895
  4. In re the Estate of KnoepflerNew York Surrogate's Court · 1962
  5. Estate of Fleishman, Superior Court of California, County of San Francisco1892

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

Powered by the Exa API