Case Name: In the Matter of the Probate of the Paper Writing Propounded as the Last Will and Testament of William Darling, Deceased; Amelia Delacroiex, Resp't. v. Catharine Lefferts, App'lt
Court: New York Supreme Court, General Term
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 1889-07-06
Citations: 25 N.Y. St. Rep. 630
Docket Number: 
Parties: In the Matter of the Probate of the Paper Writing Propounded as the Last Will and Testament of William Darling, Deceased; Amelia Delacroiex, Resp’t. v. Catharine Lefferts, App’lt
Judges: 
Reporter: New York State Reporter
Volume: 25
Pages: 630–631

Head Matter:
In the Matter of the Probate of the Paper Writing Propounded as the Last Will and Testament of William Darling, Deceased; Amelia Delacroiex, Resp’t. v. Catharine Lefferts, App’lt
(Supreme Court, General Term, First Department,
Filed July 6, 1889.)
Wills—When degree of surrogate admitting will to probate will NOT BE DISTURBED.
Where in proceedings to probate a will, the evidence bearing on the issues has been fairly and satisfactorily considered by the surrogate, and his conclusions are amply sustained by the testimony, the decree will not be disturbed.
Appeal from a decree of the surrogate’s court admitting to probate a paper writing propounded by the respondent as the last will and testament of William Darling, deceased.
L. M. Knowles, for app’lt; John Y. Boyd, for resp’t.
Affirming 10 N. Y. State Rep., 221.

Opinion:
Per Curiam.
The only questions which arise on this appeal are questions of fact. The argument in behalf of the appellant is devoted wholly to the effort to show that "this appellant, Catherine Lefferts is the daughter or child of William Darling, deceased, the testator herein." The evidence bearing on the issue of kinship is considered so fully, so fairly and so satisfactorily in the opinion of Surrogate Rollins, that an extended discussion of the proofs on our part would be little more than a repetition of the views which he has expressed. It is only necessary to say, therefore. that we deem his conclusions amply sustained by the testimony, and indeed it is difficult to perceive how any other result could have been reached.
The decree should be affirmed, with costs.