In re Estate of Rosasco
New York Surrogate Court
927 N.Y.S.2d 819 (2011)
- Written by Salina Kennedy, JD
Facts
Mildred Rosasco died in 2006, leaving an estate valued at $2.8 million. In 1997, Rosasco executed a purported will leaving her entire estate to her two sisters and, in the event both sisters predeceased her, to her great-nephew, John Cella (defendant). Cella had been kicked out of his parents’ apartment and had moved in with Rosasco and her sisters, who lived in a different apartment in the same building. Several other family members also lived in the building. Cella was present at the signing of the purported will and, at that time, had a contentious relationship with his sister, Kate. Cella often berated Rosasco for giving money to Kate and on several occasions hit Kate in Rosasco’s presence. Rosasco expressed a desire to make a new will, naming Kate as her beneficiary. However, she also expressed fear that if she did so, Cella would harm her and that, after her death, Cella would harm Kate and take Rosasco’s money anyway. At the time of Rosasco’s death, Rosasco’s sisters had predeceased her, and Cella was the sole beneficiary of her purported will. Rosasco’s surviving nieces and nephews (the distributees) (plaintiffs) objected to the probate of the document, arguing that Rosasco had signed it under duress and under undue influence. Cella filed a motion for summary judgment as to both claims.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Glen, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 832,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,400 briefs, keyed to 994 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.
