Bourgeois v. Sprague

ARCHIBALD, Justice.

Bourgeois v. Sprague, Me., 358 A.2d 521 (1976), terminated an attempted appeal because an indispensable party was not before the court, namely, the devisees uhder the will of Harvey R. Sprague.1 Rule 19(b), M.R.Civ.P. Following that decision, Irene Bourgeois, as the surviving joint tenant,2 brought a new complaint against Mildred Sprague in her admitted status as widow and sole devisee under the will of Harvey Sprague, and The Merrill Trust Company, demanding a conveyance of realty alleged to have been transferred by The Merrill Trust Company to Harvey Sprague, which…