Legal Opinion

Smith v. Rice

Supreme Court of Alabama

Decided September 6, 1956No. 6 Div. 730Published

1Opinion

On the Merits.

Rice insists that Smith is not entitled to be appointed as executor because of fraud. In our view of the case it is unnecessary for us to determine whether Smith, the person named in the will as executor, has been guilty of any fraudulent action.

Sections 68, 69 and 71, Tit. 61, Code 1940, provide as follows:

“§ 68. Grant of letters testamentary. — Whenever a will has been admitted to probate in this state, the judge of the court in which the will was probated may issue letters testamentary, according to the provisions of this article, to the persons named as the executors in such…

2Cases cited19 opinions

  1. Kidd v. BatesSupreme Court of Alabama · 1897
  2. Riley v. WilkinsonSupreme Court of Alabama · 1945
  3. Dixie Grain Co. v. QuinnSupreme Court of Alabama · 1913
  4. Bell v. FulghamSupreme Court of Alabama · 1918
  5. Castleberry v. HollingsworthSupreme Court of Alabama · 1927

14 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