In re Hammond

In re Hammond, 147 N.Y.S. 884 (1914)

Court: Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · State Appellate Courts
Decided: May 22, 1914
Docket: No. 5901
Citations: 147 N.Y.S. 884
Disposition: Reversed and motion denied.

Cited by 1

Headnotes

1. Wills (§ 211*)—Order to Produce Will. Where it is not shown that it was in possession of defendant, his production of a document purporting to be the will of the decedent should not be ordered. [Ed. Note.—For other cases, see Wills, Cent. Dig. § 518; Dec. Dig. § 211.*] 2. Wills (§ 219*)—Production and Order—“Person Interested in the Estate.” One who has parted with his entire interest in the estate of a decedent is not entitled to an order requiring the production of an alleged will of the decedent, not being a person interested in the estate within Code Civ. Proc. § 2621a, declaring that whenever it shall appear by petition of any person interested in the estate that there is reasonable ground to believe a will of the decedent has been concealed, the court must make an order requiring the production of such instrument. [Ed. Note.—For other cases, see Wills, Cent. Dig. §§ 527-531; Dec. Dig. § 219.*]

Summary

Appeal from Surrogate’s Court, New York County. Application by Charles N. Hammond for an order for the production of the will of James B. Hammond, deceased, by Arthur Lopez. From an order of the surrogate requiring production of such instru-ment, defendant appeals.

Syllabus and headnotes are prepared by the reporter or publisher, not the court, and are not part of the opinion.

Opinion of the Court

Text extracted by OCR from a scanned original; check the original for exact wording.

PER CURIAM.

[1, 2] The petitioner has failed to establish that Arthur Lopez had in his possession at the time in question any such paper characterized as a will as the petitioner describes. Furthermore, the petitioner, having parted with all his interest in the estate of the decedent, was not a person interested in such estate under section 2621a of the Code of Civil Procedure.

The order appealed from will therefore be reversed, with $10 costs and disbursements, and the motion to require said Lopez to produce the paper in question denied, with $10 costs.

How later courts describe this case

No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.

Cited by 1 case

View all citing references →

State Appellate Courts1

Relies on it most ⓘ

In re Hammond152 N.Y.S. 1115 (1915)

Most recent

In re Hammond152 N.Y.S. 1115 (1915)

Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.

Authorities cited 0

No citations to other opinions in this database were found.

`/`	Focus the search box
`j` `k`	Next / previous result
`Enter`	Open the selected result
`x`	Add / remove the selected result from the download list
`n` `p`	Next / previous search term in a case
`c`	Copy the citation of the current case
`+` `−`	Larger / smaller reading text
`?`	Show this list