Surrogate Nora Anderson
In a probate proceeding in the estate of Sarah Gross, the proponent moved for summary judgment dismissing the objections and admitting the will to probate. After the motion was filed, however, it was discovered that although the objections had been timely served on proponent’s counsel, they had not been filed with the court. After the proponent refused to consent to the filing under these circumstances, the proposed objectants moved for an order extending their time to file. The court granted the motion seeking permission to file late objections, noting that the propounded instrument disinherits two of the decedent’s three children and was drafted by the sole beneficiary’s neighbor and attorney. The court also determined that the will is genuine and was validly executed. It noted that witness affidavits provided nothing from which to infer that the propounded instrument was anything other than a product of the decedent’s own intent. The court added that the objectants failed to create a fact issue as to fraud and that the proponent offered evidence that showed that the drafting and execution of the instrument were knowingly performed.
