Legal Opinion

Keenum v. Dodson

Supreme Court of Alabama

Decided November 20, 1924No. 6 Div. 157PublishedCited by 48 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtAnderson, C. J.

In order for the homestead to have vested absolutely in the widow either by operation of law or after being set apart as provided by sections 4198 and 4224 of the Code of 1907, the deceased husband must have left no surviving minor children, as they take with the widow and their right cannot be divested by a proceeding under sections 4224 or 4198 which latter provision relates to heirs of the decedent other than the widow and minor children. In other words, the amendment, as added to section 4198 of the Code of 1907, makes no change in the vesture of the homestead in the widow and minor…

2Cases cited11 opinions

  1. Chamblee v. ColeSupreme Court of Alabama · 1900
  2. Singo v. McGheeSupreme Court of Alabama · 1909
  3. Hogan v. ScottSupreme Court of Alabama · 1914
  4. Evans v. WoodsworthIllinois Supreme Court · 1904
  5. Davis v. AlbrittonSupreme Court of Georgia · 1907

6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by48 opinions

  1. Craig v. RootSupreme Court of Alabama · 1946
  2. Bolden v. Sloss-Sheffield Steel & Iron Co.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1925
  3. Levine v. LevineSupreme Court of Alabama · 1955
  4. Williams v. OvercastSupreme Court of Alabama · 1934
  5. Hooke v. HookeSupreme Court of Alabama · 1946

43 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API