Opinion
May 22, 1997
Appeal from Surrogate's Court, New York County (Eve Preminger, S.),
There was no evidence that the testator would have changed his will if he knew of the objectant's whereabouts. Fairly read, the will indicates that the reason for the objectant's disinheritance was the lack of contact between the testator and the objectant for more than 20 years prior to the execution of the subject will in 1985 ( see, Matter of Lamonica, 199 A.D.2d 503; Matter of Land, 204 A.D.2d 64). Indeed, the testator never made any inquiries concerning the objectant's whereabouts. In addition, the claim that the drafter's fraudulent intent is inferable from his self-interest in maintaining a business account controlled by the objectant's deceased brother is so speculative as to constitute no evidence of fraud at all ( see, Blum v. Fresh Grown Preserve Corp., 292 N.Y. 241, 245-246).
Concur — Rosenberger, J.P. Wallach, Rubin, Williams and Andrias, JJ.