Legal Opinion
Hewitt v. Beattie
Supreme Court of Connecticut
Decided October 5, 1927PublishedCited by 25 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtMaltbie, J.
Certain of the defendants claim that the so-called ante-mortem claims, presented to the executor and still remaining unpaid, are now barred by lapse of time. They were duly presented within the time limited by the Court of Probate, have never been disallowed, and are apparently just claims. As we held in Robbins v. Coffing, 52 Conn. 118, in such a situation there is no applicable statute of limitation and it is not for this court to establish one. At the same time, it was early recognized in our decisions that the existence of a claim upon an estate cannot be permitted to tabe on the guise of…
2Cases cited32 opinions
- Ricard v. WilliamsSupreme Court of the United States · 1822
- Colonial Trust Co. v. BrownSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1926
- Brown v. EgglestonSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1885
- Pitkin v. PitkinSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1829
- Griswold v. BigelowSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1826
27 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by25 opinions
- Shannon v. EnoSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1935
- Reiley v. HealeySupreme Court of Connecticut · 1936
- Lubas v. McCuskerSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1965
- Beardsley v. HallMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1935
- French v. OberreuterSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1968
20 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.