Martin Pleasants & Co. v. Glasscock
Mississippi Chancery Courts
The complainants alleged in their bill that, in the year 1834, one Caleb B. Hudson, then of the county of Jackson, in the State of Alabama, died, having first made his will, which was duly probated in the county court of that county. That at the time of his death he was seised and possessed of large real and personal property.
Read the full summary
The complainants alleged in their bill that, in the year 1834, one Caleb B. Hudson, then of the county of Jackson, in the State of Alabama, died, having first made his will, which was duly probated in the county court of that county. That at the time of his death he was seised and possessed of large real and personal property. That his widow Ann M. and three children by her, and three by a former wife, survived him : that by his will, after some specific bequests to the children of his first wife, he left to his widow and her three children the rest and residue of the estate, both real and…
1Opinion of the Court
By the Chancellor.
Wm. H. Glasscock, in his lifetime, conveyed all his property, both real, personal, and mixed, in trust, to secure and pay different specified creditors, in a given order of preference, and then to pay his creditors generally, without naming them. Among the preferred creditors was'tbe estate of C. B. Hudson, deeased. Glasscock had intermarried with Hudson’s widow, who was the executrix of the estate, and his indebtedness arose out of his relation of executor. It is alleged, that by a fraudulent agreement between the trustee in the deed of trust, and Mrs. Glasscock, the whole…
2Cited by3 opinions
- Perry v. StateSupreme Court of Alabama · 1869
- Davis v. LeeMississippi Supreme Court · 1853
- Hemphill v. Bank of AlabamaMississippi Supreme Court · 1846