Court Opinion

ID: 9867925
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-09-26 17:14:47.096857+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T14:23:08.295082
License: Public Domain

Bartlett, J.,
dissents on the following grounds :
1. The Surrogate’s Court having jurisdiction to determine the factum of a will of real property, its decree against the validity of such a will is presumptive evidence of its invalidity and should have been admitted at the trial as having that effect.
2. The proceedings before Judges Kellogg and Gaynor, in the light of the stipulation, are practically one trial, and the respondents are in no position to aver surprise as to appellants’ claim that the decree was at least competent as presumptive evidence of the invalidity of the will.
All concur, with Gray, J., for affirmance) except Bartlett, J., who dissents on grounds stated in memorandum. .
Judgment affirmed.