Dunham v. Hatcher
Supreme Court of Alabama
Appeal from the Probate Court of Dallas. The record in this case shows these facts: 'Robert S. Hatcher and John A. Lodor were appointed by said court (at what time does not appear) administrators de bonis non, cum, testamento annexo, of William P. Dunham, deceased; and, by virtue of said appointment, undertook to act as testamentary guardians of Texana Dunham and Willie P. Dunham, infant children of said decedent, but without giving bond as guardians.
Read the full summary
Appeal from the Probate Court of Dallas. The record in this case shows these facts: 'Robert S. Hatcher and John A. Lodor were appointed by said court (at what time does not appear) administrators de bonis non, cum, testamento annexo, of William P. Dunham, deceased; and, by virtue of said appointment, undertook to act as testamentary guardians of Texana Dunham and Willie P. Dunham, infant children of said decedent, but without giving bond as guardians. Said Hatcher and Lodor made several partial settlements with said probate court, both as administrators, and as guardians; and at the January…
1Opinion of the Court
BIOE, O. J.
— Prom the bill of exceptions, as well as from other parts of the record, it appears that Robert L. Hatcher and John A. Lodor regarded themselves as the testamentary guardians of Texana Dunham and Willie P. Dunham, simply because they were the administrators de bonis non, cum testamento annexo, of William P. Dunham, deceased; and that for the same reason, and no other, the probate court of Dallas county treated the said Hatcher and Lodor as such guardians. The bill of exceptions clearly shows, that said Hatcher and Lodor never gave .bond as such guardians, but acted in that…
2Cited by2 opinions
- Wortham v. JohnSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1908
- Tapp v. CoxSupreme Court of Alabama · 1876