From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Matter of Warsaski

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Feb 23, 1999
258 A.D.2d 379 (N.Y. App. Div. 1999)

Opinion

February 23, 1999

Appeal from the Surrogate's Court, New York County (Renee Roth, S.).


The Surrogate properly refused to admit in evidence the manuscripts offered by the objectant to establish lack of testamentary capacity. Objectant could not authenticate them due to the strictures of CPLR 4519. Nor was there any waiver of those strictures effected by the attorney-executor's testimony, since the attorney-executor did not testify to any transactions between the deceased and the objectant, and since, as the attorney who prepared the will, he was permitted to testify about the circumstances surrounding the will's preparation ( see, CPLR 4503 [b]; Matter of Wood, 52 N.Y.2d 139). Furthermore, there was no proof of intentional destruction of any relevant documents.

Finally, objectant was given sufficient notice by the Surrogate of the firm trial date to justify the Surrogate's denial of objectant's request for an adjournment by reason of his out-of-State attorney's scheduling conflict.

Concur — Sullivan, J. P., Ellerin, Williams and Wallach, JJ.


Summaries of

Matter of Warsaski

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Feb 23, 1999
258 A.D.2d 379 (N.Y. App. Div. 1999)
Case details for

Matter of Warsaski

Case Details

Full title:In the Matter of the Estate of ABRAHAM WARSASKI, Deceased. MARSHALL…

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department

Date published: Feb 23, 1999

Citations

258 A.D.2d 379 (N.Y. App. Div. 1999)
685 N.Y.S.2d 684

Citing Cases

Matter of the Estate of Florio

Since, as already mentioned, it is appropriate in such circumstances to receive extrinsic evidence as an aid…

MATTER OF FLORIO

Since, as already mentioned, it is appropriate in such circumstances to receive extrinsic evidence as an aid…