In re Hargrove’s Will
New York Supreme Court
262 A.D. 202, 28 N.Y.S.2d 571 (1942)
- Written by Paul Neel, JD
Facts
Ernest Hargrove and Aimee Neresheimer were married and had two children (plaintiffs). A few years later, Neresheimer wanted a divorce on grounds of cruelty, admitting under oath that Hargrove had twice accused her of infidelity. Neresheimer’s father and her father’s attorney, Smith, advised the couple during the divorce. Shortly after the divorce, Smith divorced his own wife and married Neresheimer. Hargrove petitioned to have the divorce vacated on grounds that Neresheimer and Smith had been having an affair. As part of proceedings to vacate the divorce, Hargrove made an affidavit stating that the divorce’s effect on his children was his principal concern. Hargrove’s petition was denied. Hargrove then moved to New York, where he became successful in business. Neither Neresheimer nor the children spoke to Hargrove again. Before he died, Hargrove executed a will leaving his entire estate to the widow of a valued business associate and an affidavit stating that Neresheimer had informed Hargrove that he was not the father of their two children. The children challenged the will, alleging Hargrove suffered from insane delusion. The widow (defendant) claimed that Hargrove’s mind was sound and that the will was valid. The trial court found in favor of the children. The widow appealed.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Townley, J.)
Dissent (Glennon, 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. 46,500 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.
