Milam v. Ragland
Supreme Court of Alabama
Eiiítoit to the Probate Court of Talladega. P*aglaND, as administrator in. chief, cum testamento annexo, of James W. Milam, deceased, was cited by Jarvis J. Milam, the succeeding administrator, to appear and settle his administration on said estate.
Read the full summary
Eiiítoit to the Probate Court of Talladega. P*aglaND, as administrator in. chief, cum testamento annexo, of James W. Milam, deceased, was cited by Jarvis J. Milam, the succeeding administrator, to appear and settle his administration on said estate. On the settlement, Ragland claimed a credit of $849 65, and interest thereon, for money paid bjr him to the Huntsville Bank, on a note signed by said James W. Milam, one William King, and said Ragland, (in the order of their names.) A jury was empannelled to try the issue made up between the parties, whether Ragland should be allowed to retain the…
1Opinion of the CourtDargan, C. J.
It is the duty of the Court of Probate to summon a jury in cases of contested wills, also in cases of insolvent estates, if required. But in all other cases the court should determine the facts without a jury, unless it should become necessary in the progress of a cause to ascertain some particular fact, and the testimony in relation thereto is so conflicting that doubts are created in the mind of the court how'it should be decided. In such a case the court may, in the exercise of its discretion, empannel a jury to ascertain the truth of the fact. — Savage v. Dickerson, 16 Ala. 257* The…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Apthorp v. ComstockNew York Court of Chancery · 1829
- Savage v. DicksonSupreme Court of Alabama · 1849
3Cited by3 opinions
- Whitworth's Distributees v. OliverSupreme Court of Alabama · 1864
- Cary v. SimmonsSupreme Court of Alabama · 1888
- Milam v. RaglandSupreme Court of Alabama · 1854