Case ID: nys_104/html/0476-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "CHURCH, S.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

(53 Misc. Rep. 168.)
    In re GAMBER’S WILL.
    (Surrogate’s Court, Kings County.
    February, 1907.)
    Wills—Execution—Validity.
    Testatrix, when about to sign a paper, stated that it was intended to be her will, and requested the witnesses to sign as such before she' actually affixed her signature, but immediately thereupon signed her name and passed the paper over to the witnesses, who then signed. Held, a sufficient declaration and request.
    [Ed. Note.—For cases in point, see Cent. Dig. vol. 49, Wills, §§ 306, 307.1
    In the matter of the probate of the last will of Justina Gamber. Decree admitting the will to probate.
    ICramer, Cohn & Burby, for proponent.
    James C. Cropsey, for contestant.
   CHURCH, S.

It appears here that the statement of the deceased that the paper offered for probate was intended to be her last will and testament and her request to the witnesses to sign it as such were made before she signed the instrument, and that upon the witnesses, assenting to her request, and without further conversation on the subject, she signed the paper and passed it over to them for their signature as witnesses. From all the circumstances in the case it is apparent that the matter was practically completed at one transaction, and that, even if there was not a specific declaration by the deceased that this was her will after she had signed it, yet, coupled with her previous remarks, the fact that she signed it in the presence of the witnesses •and passed the paper over to them for their signature amounted, in •effect, to a request to them to sign as witnesses her last will and testament. I feel constrained, therefore, to admit the will to probate. Let findings and decree be prepared accordingly.

Decreed accordingly.