Legal Opinion

In Re Estate of Harsh

Supreme Court of Iowa

Decided March 13, 1928PublishedCited by 17 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Morling, J. —

The contention of the defendants, in substance, is that the order of the probate court authorizing the administratrix to continue the business of the deceased is void; that plaintifi! depositors' claims were never ified, and particularly not filed within six months, and therefore plaintiffs are not entitled to the status of claimants,-at least, to that of claimants of the third class, or as having priority over defendants.

James B. Harsh in his lifetime owned and operated a private bank, under the name of “The Land Credit Bank.” It was a bank of deposit. A part of his business was…

2Cases cited23 opinions

  1. Goodrich v. FerrisSupreme Court of the United States · 1909
  2. Ryan v. HutchinsonSupreme Court of Iowa · 1913
  3. Alabama Great Southern Railroad v. HillSupreme Court of Georgia · 1913
  4. Deery v. HamiltonSupreme Court of Iowa · 1875
  5. Nichols v. HarshSupreme Court of Iowa · 1926

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

3Cited by17 opinions

  1. In Re Estate of FerrisSupreme Court of Iowa · 1944
  2. In Re Estate of NicholsonSupreme Court of Iowa · 1941
  3. In Re Trusteeship Under Will of LawsonSupreme Court of Iowa · 1932
  4. In Re Estate of MyersSupreme Court of Iowa · 1943
  5. In Re Report of AtkinsonSupreme Court of Iowa · 1930

12 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