Hauberger v. Root
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
ERROR to tne Common Pleas of Chester county. This was a feigned issue, in which David M. Root and Jacob M. Root were plaintiffs, and John Hauberger, Samuel Hauberger, Jacob S. Root and Christopher Hitner defendants, directed by the Register’s Court of Chester county to try the validity of a certain paper writing purporting to be the last will and testament of Jacob Root, deceased, and bearing date the 1st May 1841. The precept issued by the Register’s Court was in the form…
Read the full summary
ERROR to tne Common Pleas of Chester county. This was a feigned issue, in which David M. Root and Jacob M. Root were plaintiffs, and John Hauberger, Samuel Hauberger, Jacob S. Root and Christopher Hitner defendants, directed by the Register’s Court of Chester county to try the validity of a certain paper writing purporting to be the last will and testament of Jacob Root, deceased, and bearing date the 1st May 1841. The precept issued by the Register’s Court was in the form prescribed by the Act of 15th March 1832, and after setting out the preliminary facts, proceeded thus: “And whereas Mr…
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the Court was delivered by
Kennedy, J.
The first, third and fourth errors raise the question whether the declarations or admissions of one of several devisees or legatees named in a supposed will, tending to prove that the alleged testator was not of sufficiently sound mind at the time to make it, or being very weak in mind was improperly influenced to make it contrary to what he would otherwise have done, be admissible or not on the trial of a feigned issue directed by the Register’s Court to determine its validity. They will therefore be considered together as one error.
The…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Dan v. BrownNew York Supreme Court · 1825
- Spence v. SpenceSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1835
- Bovard v. WallaceSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1818
- Nussear v. ArnoldSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1825
- Commonwealth v. EberleSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1817
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by14 opinions
- Shailer v. BumsteadMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1868
- Forney v. FerrellWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1871
- Baker's AppealSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1884
- In re Will of AmesSupreme Court of Iowa · 1879
- McMillan v. McDillIllinois Supreme Court · 1884
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.