Legal Opinion

Sherry v. Lozier

New York Surrogate's Court

Decided February 15, 1851PublishedCited by 5 opinions

I. The evidence is sufficient to establish the paper as a will. It cannot be presumed from the lapse of time, that the witnesses can recollect all the facts and circumstances that transpired at the time of the execution of it. Their testimony is sufficient to establish its due execution. II. The paper is not defective as a will of personal estate. Ho emergency is referred to upon which the will is to take effect. Hor is there any condition annexed or referred to.

Read the full summary

I. The evidence is sufficient to establish the paper as a will. It cannot be presumed from the lapse of time, that the witnesses can recollect all the facts and circumstances that transpired at the time of the execution of it. Their testimony is sufficient to establish its due execution. II. The paper is not defective as a will of personal estate. Ho emergency is referred to upon which the will is to take effect. Hor is there any condition annexed or referred to. TTT- The will is not revoked as to real estate, nor as to personal estate by the instrument of 1849. 1. Because there is no…

1Opinion of the Court

The Surrogate.

Ia December, 1813, David Sherry executed an instrument, of which the words in italics were in writing, and the remainder printed as follows:—■

“ In the name of God, Amen. I, Devoid Sherry, seamcm, being of sound mind and memory, and considering the uncertainty of this trail and transitory life, do, therefore, make and ordain this my last will and testament, that is to say, First, after all my just debts be paid and discharged, I give and bequeath, v/nto Joa/nah Sherry, all my real emd personal property / Likewise I make and ordain the said Jocmah Sherry to be sole executrix of…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Bradhurst v. BradhurstNew York Court of Chancery · 1829
  2. Watts v. Public AdministratorCourt for the Trial of Impeachments and Correction of Errors · 1829
  3. Reid v. BorlandMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1817

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. In re the Estate of MosherNew York Surrogate's Court · 1932
  2. Negus v. NegusSupreme Court of Iowa · 1877
  3. In re the Estate of StegeNew York Surrogate's Court · 1937
  4. In re the Will of RossignotNew York Surrogate's Court · 1906
  5. In re the Judicial Settlement of the Account of GodwinNew York Surrogate's Court · 1912

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

Powered by the Exa API