MEMORANDUM. Although the hearsay testimony of the attorney-draftsman would, under usual circumstances, be inadmissible (see Matter of Kennedy, 167 N.Y. 163; Matter of Staiger, 243 N.Y. 468, 472) the same might be received in the absence of objection (Matter of Findlay, 253 N.Y. 1, 11). The Surrogate considered this testimony in his finding that the proof offered was insufficient to rebut the presumption of intentional revocation. Since this finding of fact was affirmed by the Appellate Division, it is beyond the scope of our review.
Chief Judge BREITEL and Judges JASEN, GABRIELLI, JONES, WACHTLER, FUCHSBERG and COOKE concur.
Order affirmed, without costs, in a memorandum.