In an appeal of a will contest alleging forgery, the appellant waived objections to the propriety of the Orphans’ Court relying on samples of the decedent’s signature that were not formally moved into or admitted into evidence because the court marked the samples as exhibits, took testimony about them, and appeared to intend to use the samples as record evidence and the appellant did not object. It was not an abuse of discretion for the court to find the testimony of the decedent’s lawyer to be credible in denying the authenticity of decedent’s signature on the alleged will even after a motion for reconsideration showing that the lawyer had misled the court on other issues. The findings of the Orphans’ Court that the witnesses to the alleged were “simply mistaken” in their testimony about the preparation and execution of the will were supported by the record, and the will was shown to be a forgery by clear and convincing evidence. In re: Justino Petaccio, Deceased, 635 EDA 2024 (Pa. Super. 12/24/2024) (non-precedential).