Mindler v. Crocker
Supreme Court of Alabama
1Opinion of the Court
FOSTER, Justice.
There was a successful contest of the probation of a will. The proponent appeals. There were six grounds of the contest, which we will designate pleas, as was done in Coghill v. Kennedy, 119 Ala. 641 (3), 24 So. 459. The first two raise the question of insanity, the next two of undue influence, and the last two of the proper execution of the will. There was a motion to strike each plea. The court struck the first, and overruled the motion as to the others. Proponent then demurred on the same grounds, and it was overruled.
A plea which is not prolix, irrelevant or frivolous…
2Cases cited28 opinions
- Bancroft v. OtisSupreme Court of Alabama · 1890
- Coghill v. KennedySupreme Court of Alabama · 1898
- Wear v. WearSupreme Court of Alabama · 1916
- Miller v. WhittingtonSupreme Court of Alabama · 1918
- Bennett v. BennettSupreme Court of Alabama · 1932
23 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by20 opinions
- Bardin v. JonesSupreme Court of Alabama · 1979
- Peterson v. McMickenWyoming Supreme Court · 1954
- Hyde v. NorrisSupreme Court of Alabama · 1948
- Lackey v. LackeySupreme Court of Alabama · 1954
- Kahalley v. KahalleySupreme Court of Alabama · 1947
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.