In re the Estate of Vickery
Order unanimously affirmed without costs. Memorandum: The Surrogate erred in permitting a lay witness to express her opinion concerning the mental competence of the testatrix. It is well established that an ordinary witness may describe the acts of a person whose sanity is in question and state whether those acts impressed her as rational or irrational, but that an ordinary witness, other than a subscribing witness to the will, may not render an opinion whether the testatrix was of sound mind (see, Richardson, Evidence § 364 [m] [Prince 10th ed]). That error does not, however, require reversal.
Evidence was offered that, during execution of the will, the testatrix did not speak, and that it was her son who asked the subscribing witnesses to act as witnesses. Petitioner, the proponent of the instrument, requested the court to instruct the jury that a testatrix need not declare an instrument to be her will or ask persons to act as subscribing witnesses; that a third person acting as the agent or representative of the testatrix may make the declaration and request the witnesses to attest (see, Matter of Eckert,