Legal Opinion

Hobson v. Moorman

Tennessee Supreme Court

Decided April 15, 1905PublishedCited by 12 opinions

FROM FAYETTE. Appeal from the Circuit Court of Fayette County.— R. E. Maiden, Judge.

1Opinion of the CourtJustice McAlister

This is an issue of devisamt vel non from the circuit court of Fayette county. The will in controversy was executed by Mrs. Jane B. George, on the 23d day of October, 1899, and is attacked upon the ground of undue influence and want of testamentary capacity. The contestants are Lizzie Hobson, John D. Boyd, and Harry Boyd, family servants of the testatrix, and legatees under a prior will executed on the 29th day of June, 1898. The proponent of the present will is H. C. Moorman, who was appointed administrator cum testa-mento annexe. The case has been tried several times in the circuit court…

2Cases cited21 opinions

  1. Throckmorton v. HoltSupreme Court of the United States · 1901
  2. Shailer v. BumsteadMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1868
  3. Marx v. . McGlynnNew York Court of Appeals · 1882
  4. Waterman v. . WhitneyNew York Court of Appeals · 1854
  5. De La Cuesta v. CalkinsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1896

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

3Cited by12 opinions

  1. Cude v. CulbersonCourt of Appeals of Tennessee · 1947
  2. Ditton v. HartIndiana Supreme Court · 1911
  3. Mason v. BowenSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1916
  4. Campbell v. HenleyTennessee Supreme Court · 1937
  5. Kennedy v. QuinnSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1924

7 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