Meadows v. Meadows
Supreme Court of Alabama
Aiteal from Lee Probate Court. Tried before Hon. James K. Edwards. This was an application by W. K. Meadows, describing himself as tlie “ administrator with the will annexed of Isham Meadows, deceased,” for the sale of lands belonging to said estate for -the payment of debts.
Read the full summary
Aiteal from Lee Probate Court. Tried before Hon. James K. Edwards. This was an application by W. K. Meadows, describing himself as tlie “ administrator with the will annexed of Isham Meadows, deceased,” for the sale of lands belonging to said estate for -the payment of debts. The application avers that “ tlie estate of said Isbam Meadows is owing debts to the amount of thirteen thousand one hundred and twenty-five 50-100 dollars, that there is no personal property belonging to said estate, and that tlie will of said decedent gives no power to sell the lands of said estate for the payment of…
1Opinion of the CourtSomerville, J.
— The judgment of the probate court- in the present case must be reversed. The widow of the testator, Martha Meadows, was a devisee under his will, and seems to have dissented from its provisions within the period allowed by statute. — Code, 1876, §§ 2292-93. The application of the administrator should have alleged the fact of her being a devisee, and of her subsequent dissent, so that the allegations and proof would correspond. Petitions of this character for the-sale of a *358decedent’s lands, either for payment of debts or for distribution, must give the names of all the heirs, or devisees,…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Quarles v. CampbellSupreme Court of Alabama · 1882
3Cited by11 opinions
- Louisville & Nashville Railroad v. Marbury Lumber Co.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1899
- Phœnix Insurance v. MoogSupreme Court of Alabama · 1884
- Wilson v. HoltSupreme Court of Alabama · 1887
- National Surety Co. v. JulianSupreme Court of Alabama · 1933
- Cotton v. HollowaySupreme Court of Alabama · 1893
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.